On 04/08/2013 12:33 PM, Max Brustkern wrote:
> My feeling is, this is already broken. I don't see a MissingData
> exception get raised when I feed in a file with bad data, even
> without that change in place, so I don't think that code is doing
> anything useful.
hmm - I've seen it. it was what prompted me to start on:
> Maybe that means we should leave it in until the
> branch that fixes it (which I'm hoping to propose today or tomorrow.)
> As I'm typing this, that actually makes more sense. If nobody
> disagrees, I can put that block and the test back in. That will mean
> the test is failing, but the correction for that is something we're
> going to want as a bugfix anyway, so landing it separately makes
> sense.
On 04/08/2013 12:33 PM, Max Brustkern wrote:
> My feeling is, this is already broken. I don't see a MissingData
> exception get raised when I feed in a file with bad data, even
> without that change in place, so I don't think that code is doing
> anything useful.
hmm - I've seen it. it was what prompted me to start on:
https:/ /code.launchpad .net/~doanac/ utah/schema- bug/+merge/ 156215
> Maybe that means we should leave it in until the
> branch that fixes it (which I'm hoping to propose today or tomorrow.)
> As I'm typing this, that actually makes more sense. If nobody
> disagrees, I can put that block and the test back in. That will mean
> the test is failing, but the correction for that is something we're
> going to want as a bugfix anyway, so landing it separately makes
> sense.
okay