Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: Replace paver update_db. #1799

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 13, 2023
Merged

docs: Replace paver update_db. #1799

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 13, 2023

Conversation

dianakhuang
Copy link
Contributor

We are planning on removing paver, and
we have created an alternative Make command for
running migrations. This updates the documentation.

openedx-unsupported/devstack#1085

I haven't bumped the version or added a changelog entry because this is a minor docs change.

We are planning on removing paver, and
we have created an alternative Make command for
running migrations. This updates the documentation.

openedx-unsupported/devstack#1085
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ as an example) and run migrations:

.. code-block:: bash

$ paver update_db
$ make migrate
# Or use a more down-to-the-root command (replace aws with your version of config)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not part of your PR, but what is meant by aws here?

Copy link
Contributor

@robrap robrap Jul 12, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, I just remembered that the old call had paver install_prereqs baked in. Does that need to be added here? Also, do we have a Make equivalent for that, or is that something needed later?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We have make requirements, but I don't think this documentation requires the requirements to be installed. (aws is the old name of the production settings, I believe.)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. This comment doesn't make sense in this file, because we're using devstack, and it probably doesn't need to be replaced?
  2. In the other file, it probably makes sense to replace aws in the comment and the example command to production.

Since this merged already, I guess we'll see if one of us do a follow-up PR. :)

@dianakhuang dianakhuang merged commit 91d5376 into master Jul 13, 2023
6 checks passed
@dianakhuang dianakhuang deleted the diana/update-docs branch July 13, 2023 13:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants