Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

Update fails on new files

See original GitHub issue

Summary: When adding a new file to an already existing template, the new file is not added to an instance of the template upon update.

Im running cruft==2.5.0 here.

Step to reproduce:

Have an existing template and an instance of that template.
Add a new file to the template.
Run cruft update.

Current behaviour:

cruft check correctly detects the instance needs to be updated.

$ cruft check
FAILURE: Project's cruft is out of date! Run `cruft update` to clean this mess up.

cruft update asks me to review a diff, but when asked to show it, it reports “no changes”.

If I apply it, it reports success, but the new file has not been added.

$ cruft update
Respond with "s" to intentionally skip the update while marking your project as up-to-date or respond with "v" to view the changes that   will be applied.
Apply diff and update? (y, n, s, v) [y]: v
There are no changes.
Respond with "s" to intentionally skip the update while marking your project as up-to-date or respond with "v" to view the changes that   will be applied.
Apply diff and update? (y, n, s, v) [y]: y
Good work! Project's cruft has been updated and is as clean as possible!

Expected behaviour of cruft update:

There is a meaningful diff shown for newly added files.
If I accept it, the new files is created.
Cruft should not report success if some change could not be handled correctly.

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 3 years ago
Comments:7 (2 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

1reaction

peldszuscommented, Nov 9, 2020

Hi @samj1912!

Indeed, this was a regression, adding new files was working in 2.4.0 already. (But moving files #53 was already an issue in that version.) It is good that both are now fixed.

I see how the originally intended use of _get_deleted_files actually solves our problem. And our solution for #53 looks exactly like yours. 👍

I guess what we can learn here is that even having 100% line coverage in tests doesn’t protect us from having desired functionally still left untested. 😬

Anyway, thanks for providing the fix and the release! We’ll start using cruft now more often. 🙂

0reactions

peldszuscommented, Nov 24, 2020

This is already fixed and released in 2.6.0.