Conversation
because 3.4.0 included migration 0019 to add linkable_to_zaken, simply reverting it and removing the migration could cause issues, so instead it's kept and an explicit migration to remove the field is added
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #227 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 86.60% 86.69% +0.09%
==========================================
Files 77 79 +2
Lines 1127 1135 +8
Branches 74 74
==========================================
+ Hits 976 984 +8
Misses 135 135
Partials 16 16 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
TimdeBeer1
approved these changes
Jan 27, 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
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
because 3.4.0 included migration 0019 to add linkable_to_zaken, simply reverting it and removing the migration could cause issues, so instead it's kept and an explicit migration to remove the field is added
Changes