Let's consider this done with the landing of D2819 which adds runtime type validation.

see D2940

LGTM

closed by ca0f6a1eb7e6079ee0b8a649ff40353409c86560

closed by 414a6552143a1e2406bb980ed905969f4b778ad7

closed by f51327138fa14c5b285ffad2b2844afbb48e8462

closed by 20baa1b0bb3359e3a91a249fa1bae4d78cf1ddf2

closed by df3207a6b753b254e945db492227b3bb9bbac7d6

closed by fa4a043887e960731da5373f92e3f951ba411bc5

closed by fcca905a95a262dc5596ff2afd71c657a1bcb522

In D2914#70906, @vlorentz wrote:

In D2914#70849, @douardda wrote:

In D2914#70601, @vlorentz wrote:

it also misses tests to check date_to_db is used in release_to_db and revision_to_db

ok (but plz give all the infos/comments at once!)

It was a comment on your new version on the diff.

rebase

rebase

rebase + update for new origin visit updates entity

rebas

rebase

rebased

In D2914#70849, @douardda wrote:

In D2914#70601, @vlorentz wrote:

it also misses tests to check date_to_db is used in release_to_db and revision_to_db

ok (but plz give all the infos/comments at once!)

In D2914#70601, @vlorentz wrote:

it also misses tests to check date_to_db is used in release_to_db and revision_to_db

add a test for ctime as string in Content.from_dict()

In D2918#70261, @vlorentz wrote:

DULWICH_TARGET_TYPES are already the right enum values.

Typo in the first commit message

with the actual revision merged in...

In D2916#70253, @vlorentz wrote:

This is going in the right direction, but I don't like the CassObject thing. I think you made it because you are conflating two uses of my "Frankenstein's model objects":

1. Reads, where you can use the row directly (it's a namedtuple, so attr access)
2. Writes, where a dict would do (item access)

add a test for date_to_db so the test coverage of this later stays the same

Rebase + comments from vlorentz

Rebase

Get rid of unnecessary calls to builds() as reported by vlorentz

In D2905#70213, @vlorentz wrote:

You should rewrite all the object-generating strategies:

def releases():
    return builds(
        Release.from_dict,
        releases_d())

becomes:

releases = releases_d().map(Release.from_dict)

build() is only useful if you want hypothesis to read the constructor's signature.

Rebase and add a test, as requested.

rebase

rebase

get rid of the attrib_typecheck() decorator to prevent the need for a mypy plugin

In D2769#67614, @vlorentz wrote:

In D2769#67431, @douardda wrote:

The annotation part should be done on the whole module and, most importantly, in a dedicated revision.

The actual fix consist in a single 'if snapshot:' but this not what the diffstat "shows".

I only added annotations on code I changed.

In D2769#68176, @ardumont wrote:

In D2769#67614, @vlorentz wrote:

In D2769#67431, @douardda wrote:

The annotation part should be done on the whole module and, most importantly, in a dedicated revision.

The actual fix consist in a single 'if snapshot:' but this not what the diffstat "shows".

I only added annotations on code I changed.

Wait, i found those annotation change on the code changed reasonable.
Against spend an insane amount of time typing all the module in one go (which must be a pita).
I prefer the incremental approach.

@douardda So what's wrong here?

The fact that val did not say he added types it in the description or that he did add the types?

I kinda do the same.
I increase the types of the code when i'm incrementally changing it.
I'd like to know if that's wrong.

Also BaseModel.from_dict is currently pretty inconsistent: sometimes it will take care of instanciating model entities for attributes (e.g. for TimestampWithTimezone.timestamp), sometimes not (e.g. SkippedContent.origin)

rebased

apply vlorentz' comments