Skip to content

Record what the Alembic maintainers already said, before asking them anything - #16

Merged
rt87 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs_maintainer-positions-before-approaching
Oct 22, 2026
Merged

rt87 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs_maintainer-positions-before-approaching

Conversation

@rt87

@rt87 rt87 commented Oct 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

The proposal's plan was to open an Ideas discussion in sqlalchemy/alembic asking whether this belongs
upstream, and — as a smaller fallback — whether the alembic.plugins entry point is meant to carry an
extension like this. I searched the project's discussions before posting anything. Both questions are
already answered in public, so the plan rested on a gap that is not there.

What is on the record

  • #950 (2021) asks this exact question, with a
    link to Flyway's repeatable migrations. Answered the same day: "this is not a first class feature of
    Alembic"
    , pointing at the replaceable-objects recipe and at alembic-utils as the third-party
    implementation. With #620 that is the same answer
    twice.
  • #972, "Document how to do data migrations",
    is still open and carries an explicit, unfulfilled invitation to contribute documentation content. It
    is the one channel where this is asked for rather than unsolicited.
  • #1872 (September 2026) states what the plugin
    entry point is for: "things that extend Alembic itself, typically though not necessarily in a dialect
    agnostic way."
    That is precisely this plugin, so the narrower question needed no asking. The same answer
    calls the plugin system "useless cruft in the codebase that nobody uses" — our ground is intended, but
    unloved and barely exercised.
  • #1873 reported the iterate-the-entry-point
    behaviour as a bug; it was fixed in 1.20.1 within two days. Supporting 1.18–1.20 anyway is our own choice,
    not an open upstream question.

What changes here

docs/proposal.md gains a What the maintainers have already said section with those four sources, and the
conclusions follow from them: no fifth feature request; offer content to #972 instead, and only once there
is a real PyPI release, since a TestPyPI link gives readers nothing they can install.

Also fixed along the way:

  • the status line still claimed a private repository, nothing published — it is public, and 0.1.0a1 is on
    TestPyPI;
  • the prior-art table cited only the 2020 issue;
  • the decision list ran 4, 5a, 5.

Docs only — no code, no tests touched.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_017D7FmgZ7gdsg5dKbQWBiN7

…anything

The proposal's plan was to open an Ideas discussion asking whether this belongs
upstream, and to ask the narrower question of whether the alembic.plugins entry
point is meant to carry an extension like this. Both turn out to be answered
already, in public, so the plan was built on a gap that is not there.

Searched the project's discussions before posting anything:

- #950 asked this exact question in 2021, linking Flyway's repeatable
  migrations. Answered the same day: not a first class feature, with a pointer
  to the replaceable-objects recipe and to alembic-utils as the third-party
  implementation. Together with #620 that is the same answer twice.
- #972, "Document how to do data migrations", is still open and carries an
  explicit, unfulfilled invitation to contribute documentation content. That is
  the one channel where this is asked for rather than unsolicited.
- #1872 (September 2026) states what the plugin entry point is for: things that
  extend Alembic itself, typically in a dialect agnostic way. That is exactly
  this plugin, so the entry point is being used as intended and the question
  needed no asking. The same answer calls the plugin system cruft nobody uses.
- #1873 reported the iterate-the-entry-point behaviour as a bug and it was
  fixed in 1.20.1 within two days, so supporting 1.18 to 1.20 as well is this
  project's own choice and not an open upstream question.

Next steps now say: do not open a fifth feature request; offer content to #972
instead, and only once there is a real PyPI release to link, since TestPyPI
gives readers nothing they can install.

Also corrects the status line, which still claimed a private repository with
nothing published, and renumbers a decision list that ran 4, 5a, 5.

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017D7FmgZ7gdsg5dKbQWBiN7
@rt87
rt87 merged commit 5672cc5 into main Oct 22, 2026
10 checks passed
@rt87
rt87 deleted the docs_maintainer-positions-before-approaching branch October 22, 2026 18:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant