Refactor UpcomingInvoice so it's no longer a subclass of Invoice #1077
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
therefromhere
force-pushed
the
upcoming_invoice_refactor
branch
from
ef28789 to
0d15b5e
Compare
This is to allow Invoice to use ManyToManyFields.
therefromhere
force-pushed
the
upcoming_invoice_refactor
branch
from
0d15b5e to
1d6124a
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1077 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.59% 97.55% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 25 25
Lines 2457 2459 +2
Branches 223 223
==========================================
+ Hits 2398 2399 +1
- Misses 45 46 +1
Partials 14 14
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
This was referenced Dec 14, 2019
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is to allow Invoice to use ManyToManyFields - see #1027 .
I did try changing UpcomingInvoice to use abstract=True, but that breaks a lot of the related field logic (eg field.related_model becomes a string instead of a class), so I think it's simpler to just have an unused table.
I'll hold off on merging this until I've confirmed it resolves the issues from #1027