Fix typo in migration that removes the non-sso type#3715
Merged
Conversation
OpenAPI ChangesShow/hide ## Changes for v0.yaml:Unexpected changes? Ensure your branch is up-to-date with |
dsubak
approved these changes
Jun 30, 2026
dsubak
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a straightforward correction of a string constant, so happy to approve it on that basis.
I will note that I have not been able to test this against the noted instructions atm (see this thread for details) but that is only an issue for reverts.
… _then_ remove it, so we can backfill it if 0026 needs to roll back
dsubak
approved these changes
Jun 30, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What are the relevant tickets?
n/a
Description (What does it do?)
Noticed after testing #3714 that the non-sso contracts on RC weren't changed. The migration uses
nonsso, which is incorrect; this fixes the migration.How can this be tested?
This ended up being a bit more involved.
Before checking out this branch or updating, fake revert back to 0024:
migrate b2b 0024 --fake.Then, add back the
integration_typefield to the database. Fortunately this was a simple field, so the SQL to do that is also pretty simple:This can be run in a
dbshell. This does make the field slightly differently than it was originally - it should be nullable at this point, which is fine.Now, update this branch and run the migration forwards. It should work, and you should be able to reverse it too. There is new intermediary migration that makes integration_type nullable, so we can put the field back and backfill it if we do need to reverse out this migration again.