Skip to content

chore: raise dbt-common upper bound to <1.40.0 - #1670

Open
moomindani wants to merge 1 commit into
databricks:mainfrom
moomindani:chore/bump-dbt-common
Open

chore: raise dbt-common upper bound to <1.40.0#1670
moomindani wants to merge 1 commit into
databricks:mainfrom
moomindani:chore/bump-dbt-common

Conversation

@moomindani

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

The current ceiling <1.39.0 excludes dbt-common 1.39.0, so the pinned version stayed at 1.38.0. This raises the bound and moves the lock to 1.39.0.

1.39.0 adds an opentelemetry-api dependency; it was already in the lock, so the resolution adds one dependency line and no new package. requirements.lowest-direct.txt is unchanged.

Testing

Per bump: unit suite 1343 passed, 4 skipped; code-quality clean; uv lock --check consistent.

Functional coverage was run against a serverless SQL warehouse with all four dependency bumps applied together: tests/functional/adapter/incremental/ and tests/functional/adapter/iceberg/ gave 118 passed, 6 skipped, and 3 failures (TestAppendParquet, and the two column-tag tests) that reproduce identically on main with no bumps.

Checklist

  • I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the stated issue
  • This PR includes tests, or tests are not required/relevant for this PR
  • I have updated the CHANGELOG.md and added information about my change to the "dbt-databricks next" section.
  • [Optional] I have run the dbt-databricks-pr-ready project skill for this PR and addressed its merge-readiness feedback

Picks up dbt-common 1.39.0, which adds an opentelemetry-api dependency
(already present in the lock). The lowest-direct lock is unchanged.

Co-authored-by: Isaac <no-reply@databricks.com>
sd-db added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2026
### Description

`scripts/check_uv_lock_public_urls.py --fix` normalizes the `source = {
registry = ... }` entries but not the artifact `url` entries, and the
check it runs immediately afterwards requires both. On a lock produced
against a mirrored index that means `--fix` rewrites 114 registries,
leaves 1512 package URLs, and then reports failure — so the URLs have to
be substituted by hand before the pre-commit hook will pass.

This came up while raising four dependency bounds (#1670, #1671, #1672,
#1673): every one of them needed the same manual substitution after `uv
lock`.

`--fix` now rewrites the host of URLs shaped like the public artifact
tree. Only the host changes: the `/packages/` path identifies the
artifact and the hash recorded beside it is what guarantees integrity,
so the rewrite cannot silently point at different content. A URL without
a `/packages/` path is not a mirror of that tree, so rewriting its host
would be a guess — those are left for the check to report.

The `--fix` summary line now reports both counts, so `fix_uv_lock`
returns a `(registry_count, url_count)` pair.

### Testing

New `tests/unit/test_check_uv_lock_public_urls.py` (6 tests) covers the
check on a public and a mirrored lock, the fix on both, path and hash
preservation, and the non-mirror URL left alone. Three of them fail
against the current script.

End to end on this repo: regenerating `uv.lock` against a mirrored index
and running `--fix` alone now produces a file byte-identical to the
committed `uv.lock`, and `uv lock --check` agrees.

Unit suite 1349 passed, 4 skipped; `code-quality` clean.

### Checklist

- [x] I have run this code in development and it appears to resolve the
stated issue
- [x] This PR includes tests, or tests are not required/relevant for
this PR
- [x] I have updated the `CHANGELOG.md` and added information about my
change to the "dbt-databricks next" section.
- [ ] [Optional] I have run the `dbt-databricks-pr-ready` project skill
for this PR and addressed its merge-readiness feedback

---------

Co-authored-by: Isaac <no-reply@databricks.com>
Co-authored-by: Shubham Dhal <shubham.dhal@databricks.com>
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage report

This PR does not seem to contain any modification to coverable code.

@sd-db

sd-db commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Hi @moomindani thanks for the PR, I actually sequencing these later; for 1.13.1. There are already a lot of PRs in the pipeline and better we prioritise version bumps in a later release. Hope that's fine.

@moomindani

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Sounds good, no rush from my side.

If it's easier for you, I can re-target the four onto 1.13.latest and move the entries to its ## dbt-databricks next section — just say the word. Otherwise I'll leave them as they are and they can wait for the 1.13.1 window.

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.

2 participants