[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread JP
I cant keep up with all thats going on at this point, and the trunk was just burstingso I need to get out what we have thus far and see how far it flies. Not very far around here, I'm afraid. Just updated and ran my test suite (which passes with 0.3.3) and I'm getting batches of errors

[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread Michael Bayer
see, i wish folks would use the trunk more. yeah, file tickets, and every bug fixed becomes a unit test. this one seems like something trivial. the inheritance thing, try to track that down...we have *so many* inheritance tests at this point i cant believe theres still basic issues

[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread JP
I filed #438 for the _data_appender thing: http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/ticket/438. For the other one, I'll try to put together a simple test case outside of the code that belongs to my employer. I'll also see what I can do about setting up a buildbot in our system to test our stuff against SA

[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread JP
I added some info from pdb and from the patch you attached to the ticket. Both agree that for some reason, the attribute is a Query instance instead of an InstrumentedList instance, which is more than a little confusing. I'm trying to come up with a simplified test case, but so far I haven't been

[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread JP
(repeating my last ticket comment) Ok, I think I've tracked this down. The error is occurring because the name of the backref is 'options', which as of r2205 is being overwritten by assign_mapper. I'm not sure what's the right thing to do here. I don't think assign_mapper can avoid stepping on

[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread Michael Bayer
hey jason - someone reported an error regarding many-to-one relationships to certain polymorphic joins, which was definitely introduced in 0.3.4. ive fixed that issue in rev 2250. if your inheritance conditions use polymorphic unions, you might want to try it out and see if it resolves

[sqlalchemy] Re: SA 0.3.4 released

2007-01-24 Thread Michael Bayer
ahha ! every time i let the little inoccuous ones go through this is what we get. this is actually somewhat of a legacy behavior, as the idea of saying class Foo(object):someattribute=list was the old way to specify the collection_class setting, and thats whats happening here; attribute