Fixed #648 #641 -- Prevent --skip-checks conflict issue

[danh91]

trafficstars

#648 #641

PR description

https://github.com/bernardopires/django-tenant-schemas/issues/648#issuecomment-671115840

Tested with:

• Django=3.1

[rj76]

When is this going to get merged? I reckon quite some people want this.

[AceTugboat]

Yes please, I too would like this merged in.

[OskarPersson]

ping @bernardopires @goodtune

[marktiu]

👍

[amir99]

+1

[OskarPersson]

@DanH91 The same exact change is also needed in tenant_schemas/management/commands/tenant_command.py, could you (or maintainer @goodtune or @bernardopires) update this PR to include that too? This would then also close #634 #641 and #648

[danh91]

@OskarPersson I am more than glad to do it. However, we will need @goodtune or @bernardopires to approve before it makes it in.

[OskarPersson]

Great! Just want to make sure that as much is possible is included (while keeping to the scope of the PR) when it eventually gets merged :)

[jeroenbrouwer]

Wouldn't it be better to check for django version >= 3.1 before setting the requires_system_checks = []?

[mo-mughrabi]

+1

[AdamiHamza]

+1

[barrerajl]

+1

[danh91]

Hey guys, In addition to migrate_schemas, I made two other commits to fix collectstatic_schemas and tenant_command since they were all affected by the same --skip-checks issue.

@goodtune @bernardopires

[crstnrm]

+1

[RuchitMicro]

Hello is this added ?

[thelinuxer]

My whole django 3.1 upgrade is blocked by this. Can we please merge it ?

[rj76]

My whole django 3.1 upgrade is blocked by this. Can we please merge it ?

You, and others, might want to merge to django-tenants (https://pypi.org/project/django-tenants/). It's a fork that's actively supported.

[RuchitMicro]

I would suggest people, move from this and go to Django-tenants. It is a fork to Django-tenant-schemas and it's more active.

[arvindyadav124]

When are we going to merge this? Any timeline, please? @goodtune @bernardopires

[amontalban]

I had to move to django-tenants because of this.

[flexabyte]

Any news on someone with write access to merge this? It appears it's passing all checks and should be fine to merge no?

[mast3rbow]

Agree @flexabyte, kinda stuck on lower Django version waiting for this merge.

[jaydipkmn]

@goodtune and @bernardopires any news on when this is going to get merged ? Its kind of blocker for us.

[Hudeh]

still not working am using django 3.1

[chauncy-sue]

let's do it, i've hold my project for more than 20 years because of this things, my boss cannot wait for somedays he's to0 old to waiting

[tomi-bigpi]

Just a heads up for anyone that's watching just this PR and not current releases - It looks like these changes are in the master branch from the following commits:

• https://github.com/bernardopires/django-tenant-schemas/commit/f4c508a6d08301917b7e4a75e1101644eca9f15d
• https://github.com/bernardopires/django-tenant-schemas/commit/44a95bee4e32cdceff52adb9030e6725578a8ee6
• https://github.com/bernardopires/django-tenant-schemas/commit/dfbdbd359cb3409e661b818ca3b89635a88eee6a
• https://github.com/bernardopires/django-tenant-schemas/commit/711dda094e806e62de5f13b6f54b991f3b68f6dc

...and version 1.11.0 has been released.

I'm assuming that those resolve the issue (haven't tested yet) and this PR could be closed?