Vincent Untz (vu...@suse.com) wrote: > Le lundi 05 août 2013, à 12:39 +0100, Adam Spiers a écrit : > > Vincent Untz (vu...@suse.com) wrote: > > > A few weeks ago, I started the work on allowing schema changes in > > > pebbles, without breaking existing proposals. In short, there's a > > > migration rake task that will update the proposal (and its matching > > > role, if committed) to the updated schema. > > > > [snipped] > > > > Looks good to me except for the point I already made: > > > > > - there are migration scripts in > > > /opt/dell/chef/data_bags/crowbar/migrate/$barclamp/. The scripts > > > must be named $rev_$somedescription.rb; the filename can have > > > 0 (001_foobar.rb will work as well as 1_foobar.rb). There can be > > > multiple scripts per revision; they will be executed by alphabetical > > > order (or reverse alphabetical order in case of downgrades). > > > > https://github.com/crowbar/barclamp-crowbar/pull/613#issuecomment-21722923 > > Ah, I had forgotten about that one :-) > > As the migration scripts will be provided by the barclamp, and most > barclamps won't need more than one migration script per revision, such a > requirement on the naming of the migration scripts is, imho, not needed. > People can do it, but forcing this is a bit too much to my taste. Don't > know how others feel, though?
I agree it's not pretty. I was just worried about engineering ourselves into a corner with no obvious way out. If we were ever in a position where we originally thought only one script xxx_foo.rb would be required for a given (barclamp, revision) combination, and then we realised we needed more than one, and the order mattered, then I guess we could rename xxx_foo.rb to xxx_01_foo.rb before introducing xxx_02_bar.rb? _______________________________________________ Crowbar mailing list Crowbar@dell.com https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/crowbar For more information: http://crowbar.github.com/
