On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Mike Bayer <mike...@zzzcomputing.com> wrote:
> Branch labels are exactly what solves this? What's wrong with using a
> branch label? you put "v1.2.1" as a branch label in the target revision
> and then your "alembic downgrade v1.2.1" command works exactly.
>
Sorry, reading the documentation I was distracted by the @head notations
etc. and missed the part where a "bare" branch label does indeed work like
a tag.
>From the docs, it still seems like branch labels were designed to solve a
different problem, and just incidentally happens to solve this too, but if
you say it's a proper use of branch_labels, I'm obviously not gonna argue.
;-)
There's a weird side-effect, in that our Alembic history is (so far)
linear, so all branch labels show up for every revision, e.g.:
Branch names: v1.2.3, v1.2.2, v1.2.1, v1.2.0
That was part of what confused me, and could get unwieldy eventually, but I
guess it's just a cosmetic issue.
of course, if you actually git tag your project, the head revision file can
> be located from that git tag.
Yeah, but we can't depend on people having full VCS history available, we
have to support snapshot downloads too. :-/
So branch_labels it is. Thanks!
Best,
Søren
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sqlalchemy-alembic" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sqlalchemy-alembic+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
