On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 18:59 -0600, Norman Harman wrote: > SmileyChris wrote: > > Collin has put a lot of effort in to this ticket [1] which is still > > waiting as a design decision. The latest patch is (apart from lack of > > docs) ready for check-in in my opinion. Could we have a decision on > > whether this is worthy? > > Nobody knows me, so my opinion isn't worth much. But, this would be good. > Better would > be if it were transparent(properties or some other mechanism to notice when > fields are set > and therefore dirty/need updating). I'm fairly surprised something like this > isn't > already the default behavior.
See earlier threads for why transparent behaviour is not a very safe idea. If you override save(), for example, it's going to be very easy to end up with things not being saved. This is not common behaviour, so asking somebody to at least pass in an extra param or two isn't going to kill them. Regards, Malcolm -- How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise my hand... http://www.pointy-stick.com/blog/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
