Re: deprecate CommaSeparatedIntegerField?

2016-01-20 Thread Josh Smeaton
>> It's an edge case, either way (who puts hundreds of numbers in such a field?) I'm not saying it's good or right, but I can easily see how people would store hundreds of comma separated values as a poor version of a m2m table. I'm not sure that the difference between NVARCHAR2 and VARCHAR2

does anyone use contrib.auth's "test models"? (CustomUser and ExtensionUser)

2016-01-20 Thread Tim Graham
As Simon noted in a ticket [1], "Since the introduction of contrib application migrations in 1.8 (#22170 ) the ​documented custom user test models

Re: deprecate CommaSeparatedIntegerField?

2016-01-20 Thread Shai Berger
On Wednesday 20 January 2016 23:48:59 Tim Graham wrote: > A proposal has been raised to change the validation for > CommaSeparatedIntegerField to allow negative numbers [1]. This is obviously > backwards-incompatible, so I don't think it'll fly without some option to > control the behavior,

deprecate CommaSeparatedIntegerField?

2016-01-20 Thread Tim Graham
A proposal has been raised to change the validation for CommaSeparatedIntegerField to allow negative numbers [1]. This is obviously backwards-incompatible, so I don't think it'll fly without some option to control the behavior, however, I wanted to ask if there's any reason not to deprecate