fix(CLI): fix "db init" #231
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Not much to fix here. The extension tables aren't handled but they can't be unless we were to create some sort of new extension type which provides a list of tables to create. Given that the only use of such an extension would be to pass them to `create_tables` in this function, it may be more trouble than it's worth. Probably easier for both alpenhorn and the extension creators to just tell them to create their own tables. In any case, it's very low priority.
ljgray
approved these changes
Nov 15, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Not much to fix here. The extension tables aren't handled but they can't be unless we were to create some sort of new extension type which provides a list of tables to create.
Given that the only use of such an extension would be to pass them to
create_tablesin this function, it may be more trouble than it's worth. Probably easier for both alpenhorn and the extension creators to just tell them to create their own tables.In any case, it's very low priority.
I had another command in the
dbgroup listed in #202 calledstatus. Not sure it's going to get implemented. Not sure what it would tell us. Perhaps more useful would be an integrity-checkingdb checkcommand. But neither are on the table at the moment.