Test failure with dj-database-url == 2.2.0
Upon upgrading dj-database-url to 2.2.0, I'm getting the following test failure:
$ PYTHONPATH=. django-cadmin test
Found 70 test(s).
Creating test database for alias 'default'...
System check identified no issues (0 silenced).
...........................F../tmp/django-configurations/.venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/dj_email_url.py:89: UserWarning: `smtps` scheme will be deprecated in a future version, use `submission` instead
warnings.warn(
........................................
======================================================================
FAIL: test_database_url_value (tests.test_values.ValueTests.test_database_url_value)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/tmp/django-configurations/tests/test_values.py", line 376, in test_database_url_value
self.assertEqual(value.setup('DATABASE_URL'), {
AssertionError: {'default': {'NAME': ':memory:', 'USER': '', 'PASSWORD'[151 chars]e3'}} != {'default': {'CONN_HEALTH_CHECKS': False, 'CONN_MAX_AGE[113 chars] ''}}
{'default': {'CONN_HEALTH_CHECKS': False,
'CONN_MAX_AGE': 0,
- 'DISABLE_SERVER_SIDE_CURSORS': False,
'ENGINE': 'django.db.backends.sqlite3',
'HOST': '',
'NAME': ':memory:',
'PASSWORD': '',
'PORT': '',
'USER': ''}}
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 70 tests in 2.463s
FAILED (failures=1)
Destroying test database for alias 'default'...
@mgorny - this project is no longer managed by the maintainers. I have recreated django-congurations as django-configurator, updated to support the latest Django and Python version, modernised the package manager and integrated a few enhancements and fixes. You can switch to using it by replacing "configurations" with "dj_configurator" in your manage.py, wsgi.py or asgi.py and it will work as before: https://github.com/UhuruTechnology/django-configurator
It currently works with dj_database_url v 3.0.0
You are welcome to contribute to this new project and I will ensure it is processed in a timely way and released to PyPi.
Given that jazzband is a collaborative project and FWIU you could just join it and maintain it, I really don't understand the purpose of forking and renaming it.
Also, I'm not a "user". I'm a packager. The only reason I interact with django-configurations is because other packages use it. I'm not interested in packaging a fork unless it is actually required by other packages, and when it is, I will be thoroughly frustrated that I have to maintain two packages now.
Fair enough. FYI: I tried.... and the maintainers were not interested in accepting help.... their lack of interest in the project is supported by the rising number of unanswered issues and PR's.