I really like the .annotate() version. The way this feature works with .annotate() is easy to understand if you understand how existing .annotate() functions work. But, if we go with this approach, it might look a bit strange if we don't do an automatic select_related(). On the other hand, there are cases where you definitely don't want to do a select_related(), like if the relation annotation is only used in further aggregation. So, maybe there should be opt-out, or maybe we just don't do any automatic select_related for this case.
I do like the .annotate() version for other reasons, too. There are variants of this feature which would work nicely with the annotate style, that is either annotation querysets for objects that do *not* have a relation to the original queryset, or annotation raw SQL directly. - Anssi PS. It seems the Google Groups UI acts a bit strange for me today. I hope this post does arrive to the group in a readable format... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/4ceb0715-bd6b-4860-a6e6-77dc9ecabae6%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
