Skip to content

Release 25.6.2#203

Merged
jason-ford-codecov merged 2 commits intomainfrom
release/25.6.2
Jun 3, 2025
Merged

Release 25.6.2#203
jason-ford-codecov merged 2 commits intomainfrom
release/25.6.2

Conversation

@codecov-releaser
Copy link
Contributor

Release PR for 25.6.2
I've updated the version name and committed: ad3ae54.

@seer-by-sentry
Copy link
Contributor

seer-by-sentry bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Sentry detected 0 potential issues in your recent changes

Lower risk findings
The new migration `0070_increment_version.py` might fail if the 'version' constant record is missing, as `Constants.objects.get()` lacks error handling for `DoesNotExist`. This could prevent deployment.
  • Description: The migration 0070_increment_version.py attempts to retrieve a Constants object with key="version" using Constants.objects.get(). This method raises a DoesNotExist exception if no such object exists. While the "version" record is expected to be created by migration 0030, skipping earlier migrations could result in its absence. The current code at libs/shared/shared/django_apps/core/migrations/0070_increment_version.py:8 lacks error handling for this specific exception. If the "version" record is missing, the migration will fail at this line, preventing the migration from completing. This would block deployment or upgrades, potentially preventing the application from starting correctly. For example, if a database was initialized without running migration 0030, attempting to run migration 0070 would trigger this failure.
  • Code location: libs/shared/shared/django_apps/core/migrations/0070_increment_version.py:8
  • Suggested fix: Wrap the Constants.objects.get(key="version") call in a try/except block to handle the DoesNotExist exception gracefully, perhaps by creating the record if it's missing.

Did you find this useful? React with a 👍 or 👎

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 94.20%. Comparing base (2db5bcd) to head (cc0c66a).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #203   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.20%   94.20%           
=======================================
  Files        1203     1204    +1     
  Lines       44991    45000    +9     
  Branches     1431     1431           
=======================================
+ Hits        42383    42392    +9     
  Misses       2305     2305           
  Partials      303      303           
Flag Coverage Δ
apiunit 96.39% <ø> (ø)
sharedintegration 39.87% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
sharedunit 88.01% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
workerintegration 61.73% <ø> (ø)
workerunit 90.84% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@codecov-notifications
Copy link

codecov-notifications bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Jun 2, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #203 will not alter performance

Comparing release/25.6.2 (cc0c66a) with main (243a7be)

Summary

✅ 9 untouched benchmarks

@jason-ford-codecov jason-ford-codecov added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 3, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 831ba39 Jun 3, 2025
51 checks passed
@jason-ford-codecov jason-ford-codecov deleted the release/25.6.2 branch June 3, 2025 17:45
michelletran-sentry pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2025
* Prepare release 25.6.2

* increment version

---------

Co-authored-by: Nora Shapiro <nora.shapiro@sentry.io>
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

Comments