From 9b55cee4475af43a26fdb33e1f9a4f33c9b53750 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fabro Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 08:01:48 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] checkpoint MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ⚒️ Generated with [Fabro](https://fabro.sh) --- checkpoint.json | 50 ++++++++++++++-------- nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json | 5 +++ nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json | 5 +++ nodes/extract_patch/status.json | 6 +++ 4 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) create mode 100644 nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json create mode 100644 nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json create mode 100644 nodes/extract_patch/status.json diff --git a/checkpoint.json b/checkpoint.json index 8b761ea86..7ac3aa101 100644 --- a/checkpoint.json +++ b/checkpoint.json @@ -1,38 +1,51 @@ { - "timestamp": "2026-03-16T12:01:45.157969Z", - "current_node": "solve", + "timestamp": "2026-03-16T12:01:48.756421Z", + "current_node": "extract_patch", "completed_nodes": [ "start", "setup", - "solve" + "solve", + "extract_patch" ], "node_retries": { "setup": 1, "start": 1, + "extract_patch": 1, "solve": 4 }, "context_values": { "thread.setup.current_node": "solve", - "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: ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n", + "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**: fail\n\n## Context\n- failure_class: transient_infra\n- failure_signature: solve|transient_infra|api_transient|gemini|rate_limited\n", "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.", "thread.start.current_node": "setup", "internal.retry_count.solve": 4, - "current_node": "solve", - "internal.thread_id": "setup", + "internal.retry_count.extract_patch": 1, + "current_node": "extract_patch", + "internal.thread_id": "solve", "graph.rankdir": "LR", - "command.output": "fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.\n", - "failure_signature": "solve|transient_infra|api_transient|gemini|rate_limited", + "command.output": "", + "failure_signature": "", + "thread.solve.current_node": "extract_patch", "command.stderr": "", "internal.run_id": "01KKV895DBNNFDRK0D4NWFHH7T", "internal.retry_count.start": 1, "internal.node_visit_count": 1, - "outcome": "fail", + "outcome": "success", "internal.retry_count.setup": 1, "internal.fidelity": "compact", - "failure_class": "transient_infra" + "failure_class": "" }, "logs": [], "node_outcomes": { + "solve": { + "status": "fail", + "failure": { + "message": "LLM error: Rate limited by gemini: You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits. To monitor your current usage, head to: https://ai.dev/rate-limit. \n* Quota exceeded for metric: generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_requests_per_model, limit: 25, model: gemini-3.1-pro\nPlease retry in 14.840210969s.", + "failure_class": "transient_infra", + "failure_signature": "api_transient|gemini|rate_limited" + }, + "duration_ms": 83280 + }, "start": { "status": "success", "duration_ms": 0 @@ -49,23 +62,24 @@ }, "duration_ms": 256 }, - "solve": { - "status": "fail", - "failure": { - "message": "LLM error: Rate limited by gemini: You exceeded your current quota, please check your plan and billing details. For more information on this error, head to: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/rate-limits. To monitor your current usage, head to: https://ai.dev/rate-limit. \n* Quota exceeded for metric: generativelanguage.googleapis.com/generate_requests_per_model, limit: 25, model: gemini-3.1-pro\nPlease retry in 14.840210969s.", - "failure_class": "transient_infra", - "failure_signature": "api_transient|gemini|rate_limited" + "extract_patch": { + "status": "success", + "context_updates": { + "command.output": "", + "command.stderr": "" }, - "duration_ms": 83280 + "notes": "Script completed: git diff", + "duration_ms": 220 } }, - "next_node_id": "extract_patch", + "next_node_id": "exit", "loop_failure_signatures": { "setup|deterministic|script failed with exit code: ## stdout fatal: destination path '.' already exists and is not an empty directory.": 1 }, "node_visits": { "setup": 1, "start": 1, + "extract_patch": 1, "solve": 1 } } \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json b/nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6d29afc80 --- /dev/null +++ b/nodes/extract_patch/script_invocation.json @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +{ + "command": "git diff", + "language": "shell", + "timeout_ms": null +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json b/nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7fb9dd37f --- /dev/null +++ b/nodes/extract_patch/script_timing.json @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +{ + "duration_ms": 219, + "exit_code": 0, + "timed_out": false +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/nodes/extract_patch/status.json b/nodes/extract_patch/status.json new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e9986f1ff --- /dev/null +++ b/nodes/extract_patch/status.json @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ +{ + "status": "success", + "notes": "Script completed: git diff", + "failure_reason": null, + "timestamp": "2026-03-16T12:01:48.755701+00:00" +} \ No newline at end of file