Looks good (I wasn't familiar with the to: syntax). I'll trust that you've checked the resulting schema.
15:50 < noodles> achuni: won't the backwards migration work just fine (as it'll update 'back' to null=True?)
15:51 < achuni> noodles: ah hm
15:51 < achuni> hmmm
15:51 < noodles> (I assume south is just using the orm spec from the previous migration right?)
15:52 < achuni> noodles: you're right, the signature in the backwards method is just a guessed comment, it'll migrate "back" to the frozen state from the previous migration
15:52 < achuni> noodles: so actually the migration that will break when migrating backwards is 0003, if we have null users in reviewmoderationflag objects
15:53 < noodles> Yep.
Looks good (I wasn't familiar with the to: syntax). I'll trust that you've checked the resulting schema.
15:50 < noodles> achuni: won't the backwards migration work just fine (as it'll update 'back' to null=True?) nflag objects
15:51 < achuni> noodles: ah hm
15:51 < achuni> hmmm
15:51 < noodles> (I assume south is just using the orm spec from the previous migration right?)
15:52 < achuni> noodles: you're right, the signature in the backwards method is just a guessed comment, it'll migrate "back" to the frozen state from the previous migration
15:52 < achuni> noodles: so actually the migration that will break when migrating backwards is 0003, if we have null users in reviewmoderatio
15:53 < noodles> Yep.