orokusaki <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for the replies guys. I'll follow the progress of that ticket. On Apr 12, 5:38 am, Karen Tracey <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 10:15 AM, orokusaki <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > The only idea I have for a solution is: > > > > class Meta: > > > unique_together = (('account', 'name', 'You already have a > > > Widget with this Name.'),) > > > [snip] > > > That said - my initial reaction is that while I agree with the use > > case, I'm not a huge fan of the syntax - There is not syntactic > > separation between column names and error messages; while that isn't > > necessarily syntactically ambiguous, it's certainly conceptually > > ambiguous. > > Agreed on the objection to that proposed syntax. > > Just for reference, there is a ticket for customizable unique error > messages, #8913. Whatever is eventually done here needs to consider both > plain unique and unique_together messages -- the ticket at the moment only > seems to consider the former, but it would not make sense to add support for > that without also doing the unique_together case. > > Karen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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.
