Skip to content

[DO NOT MERGE] Test CI against dandi-schema#419 consolidated models - #2866

Closed
candleindark wants to merge 3 commits into
dandi:masterfrom
candleindark:test-dandischema-consolidate-models
Closed

[DO NOT MERGE] Test CI against dandi-schema#419 consolidated models#2866
candleindark wants to merge 3 commits into
dandi:masterfrom
candleindark:test-dandischema-consolidate-models

Conversation

@candleindark

@candleindark candleindark commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

⚠️ DO NOT MERGE

This is a throwaway PR whose only purpose is to run this repository's CI against the consolidated Dandiset/Asset publication models proposed in dandi/dandi-schema#419, before that PR is merged and released. Close it once CI has reported.

What it does

The single commit temporarily repoints the dandischema dependency at the consolidate-models branch of dandi/dandi-schema (pinned in uv.lock to the exact commit) and adds tool.hatch.metadata.allow-direct-references = true so the direct git reference is accepted.

Why

dandi-schema#419's own CI already runs the archive/dandi-cli integration with the consolidated models on the client side. What it does not run is this repository's own test suite. This PR closes that gap:

  • backend-ci runs the archive's own publication-validation tests (the factory- and hand-built metadata validated against PublishedDandiset / PublishedAsset) against the consolidated models.
  • cli-integration builds the archive image with the consolidated models while running dandi-cli with a released dandischema on the client. A green run demonstrates that the consolidation does not force dandi-cli and dandi-archive to upgrade dandischema in lockstep at the code level.

Note that DANDI_SCHEMA_VERSION coordination between the services at release time is a separate matter and is unaffected by what this PR verifies.

Test plan

  • backend-ci passes against the consolidated models.
  • cli-integration passes (consolidated server + released client).
  • Close this PR without merging.

Temporarily point the `dandischema` dependency at the `consolidate-models`
branch of dandi/dandi-schema (PR dandi/dandi-schema#419) so this repository's
CI exercises the consolidated `Dandiset`/`Asset` publication models before that
PR is merged and released. This branch is throwaway and must not be merged; it
exists only to run CI against the candidate schema.

`backend-ci` runs the archive's own publication-validation tests against the
consolidated models, and `cli-integration` additionally builds the archive
image with the consolidated models while running dandi-cli with a released
dandischema on the client, demonstrating that the consolidation does not force
dandi-cli and dandi-archive to upgrade dandischema in lockstep.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Code 2.1.212 / Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
candleindark and others added 2 commits July 27, 2026 18:16
The lock recorded `60cc4de8`, which predates the `DANDI_SCHEMA_VERSION`
bump to `0.8.0`. Refresh it to `99c09bf9` so that CI exercises the current
state of the branch.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Code 2.1.220 / Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
dandi-schema#419 was rebased onto `master` after its two
`api-with-schema.Dockerfile` CI commits were split out into
dandi-schema#435 and merged, so its old tip (`99c09bf9`, which this
lock still pointed at) no longer exists on the branch. Re-resolve the
`consolidate-models` git reference to the current tip (`227cdd01`) so
this PR's CI runs against what dandi-schema#419 now contains.

The unrelated `secretstorage` marker simplification is incidental
churn from `uv` re-canonicalizing the whole lockfile; it is
semantically a no-op on every platform where `secretstorage` installs.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Code 2.1.220 / Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@candleindark

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

dandi/dandi-schema#419 is merged. There is no need for this PR anymore.

@candleindark
candleindark deleted the test-dandischema-consolidate-models branch August 3, 2026 20:33
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.

1 participant