scriptoriumadmin/fabro
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/fabro-sh/fabro.git synced 2026-09-08 22:21:45 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1

checkpoint

Browse source 
⚒️ Generated with [Fabro](https://fabro.sh)
This commit is contained in:
Fabro 2026-03-16 01:32:54 -04:00
parent f4a74e4dcb
commit 34cfe43825
4 changed files with 55 additions and 25 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

64
checkpoint.json
View file

@ -1,56 +1,53 @@
{
"timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:32:52.114485Z",
"current_node": "solve",
"timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:32:54.188784Z",
"current_node": "extract_patch",
"completed_nodes": [
"start",
"setup",
"solve"
"solve",
"extract_patch"
],
"node_retries": {
"start": 1,
"solve": 1,
"setup": 1
"setup": 1,
"extract_patch": 1
},
"context_values": {
"graph.rankdir": "LR",
"internal.fidelity": "compact",
"failure_class": "",
"graph.goal": "Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.\nDescription\n\t\nError message:\ntable_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.\nWe have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.\nWe have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. \nIs this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nRegression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\nI agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.",
"current_node": "solve",
"current_node": "extract_patch",
"failure_signature": "",
"thread.start.current_node": "setup",
"internal.retry_count.solve": 1,
"outcome": "success",
"thread.setup.current_node": "solve",
"command.output": "fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
"command.output": "",
"command.stderr": "",
"response.solve": "The commit shows this is a Fabro run that attempted to setup something. The issue description provided is about Django, but the actual repository is Fabro. \n\n**I believe there's been a mismatch in the task setup.** The description talks about fixing a Django issue, but the workspace is for the Fabro project.\n\nTo clarify: **What should I actually fix?**\n\n1. **If this is meant to be a Django fix**: I would need a Django repository, not the Fabro repository. The setup script was trying to clone Django but failed because it's running in the wrong directory.\n\n2. **If this is meant to work on Fabro**: Then the Django issue description is incorrect context.\n\nCould you clarify which one is the actual task? Should I:\n- A) Fix the setup to properly clone the Django repository somewhere it can work?\n- B) Fix something in the Fabro codebase?\n- C) Something else?\n\nPlease provide clarification so I can proceed with the correct fix.",
"last_stage": "solve",
"internal.thread_id": "setup",
"internal.retry_count.extract_patch": 1,
"internal.thread_id": "solve",
"internal.run_id": "01KKTJ36PQZPF06JG2N16FT7FR",
"internal.retry_count.start": 1,
"internal.retry_count.setup": 1,
"last_response": "The commit shows this is a Fabro run that attempted to setup something. The issue description provided is about Django, but the actual repository is Fabro. \n\n**I believe there's been a mismatch in the",
"current.preamble": "Goal: Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.\nDescription\n\t\nError message:\ntable_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.\nWe have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.\nWe have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. \nIs this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nRegression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\nI agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\n\n## Completed stages\n- **setup**: fail\n - Script: `git clone https://github.com/django/django.git . && git checkout 65e86948b80262574058a94ccaae3a9b59c3faea && python -m pip install -e .`\n - Stdout:\n ```\n fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n ```\n - Stderr: (empty)\n\n## Context\n- failure_class: deterministic\n- failure_signature: setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
"internal.node_visit_count": 1
"current.preamble": "Goal: Django throws error when different apps with different models have the same name table name.\nDescription\n\t\nError message:\ntable_name: (models.E028) db_table 'table_name' is used by multiple models: base.ModelName, app2.ModelName.\nWe have a Base app that points to a central database and that has its own tables. We then have multiple Apps that talk to their own databases. Some share the same table names.\nWe have used this setup for a while, but after upgrading to Django 2.2 we're getting an error saying we're not allowed 2 apps, with 2 different models to have the same table names. \nIs this correct behavior? We've had to roll back to Django 2.0 for now.\n\n\n\n## Additional Context\n\nRegression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\nI agree with your opinion. Assigning to myself, patch on its way Replying to Claude Paroz: Regression in [5d25804eaf81795c7d457e5a2a9f0b9b0989136c], ticket #20098. My opinion is that as soon as the project has a non-empty DATABASE_ROUTERS setting, the error should be turned into a warning, as it becomes difficult to say for sure that it's an error. And then the project can add the warning in SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS.\n\n## Completed stages\n- **setup**: fail\n - Script: `git clone https://github.com/django/django.git . && git checkout 65e86948b80262574058a94ccaae3a9b59c3faea && python -m pip install -e .`\n - Stdout:\n ```\n fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n ```\n - Stderr: (empty)\n- **solve**: success\n - Model: claude-haiku-4-5, 4.0k tokens in / 1.2k out\n",
"internal.node_visit_count": 1,
"thread.solve.current_node": "extract_patch"
},
"logs": [],
"node_outcomes": {
"setup": {
"status": "fail",
"context_updates": {
"command.stderr": "",
"command.output": "fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n"
},
"failure": {
"message": "Script failed with exit code: 128\n\n## stdout\nfatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
"failure_class": "deterministic"
},
"duration_ms": 49
},
"start": {
"extract_patch": {
"status": "success",
"duration_ms": 0
"context_updates": {
"command.output": "",
"command.stderr": ""
},
"notes": "Script completed: git diff",
"duration_ms": 31
},
"solve": {
"status": "success",
@ -69,15 +66,32 @@
"cost": 0.0079608
},
"duration_ms": 17847
},
"setup": {
"status": "fail",
"context_updates": {
"command.stderr": "",
"command.output": "fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n"
},
"failure": {
"message": "Script failed with exit code: 128\n\n## stdout\nfatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n",
"failure_class": "deterministic"
},
"duration_ms": 49
},
"start": {
"status": "success",
"duration_ms": 0
}
},
"next_node_id": "extract_patch",
"next_node_id": "exit",
"loop_failure_signatures": {
"setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: <n> ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.": 1
},
"node_visits": {
"start": 1,
"solve": 1,
"setup": 1,
"solve": 1
"extract_patch": 1
}
}

5
nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
{
"command": "git diff",
"language": "shell",
"timeout_ms": null
}

5
nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
{
"duration_ms": 31,
"exit_code": 0,
"timed_out": false
}

6
nodes/extract_patch/status.json Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
{
"status": "success",
"notes": "Script completed: git diff",
"failure_reason": null,
"timestamp": "2026-03-16T05:32:54.188579+00:00"
}