Neil Williams <codeh...@debian.org> writes: > Again, I also spotted this and thought it was the source. However, > changing this causes the migration to fail with 1.10 as there are > objects in this model which must be applied before > lava_scheduler_app/0001_initial will complete. e.g. the AuthToken > object is referred to directly in lava_scheduler_app/0001_initial and > this is defined by linaro_django_xmlrpc
Yes, I was just attempting to publicly document what is causing the problem, as opposed to coming up with a solution to the problem. > I tried a few simplistic edits of those migration files on a test > instance, the migrations still fail to apply. I had a feeling simple changes would not work here. My generally feeling at the moment is: A. Create simple minimal test case with two Django Apps and a script that does the minimum required to demonstrate the problem. B. Create a Django bug report pointing to our test case. They may or may not accept it as a bug in Django, however it would be good to get their feedback. C. My idea for a work around is to write code that will directly update the Django migration tables to indicate that this migration really has been applied. -- Brian May <b...@debian.org>
