#23405: Blank-able CharFields require default=''
----------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: yuvadm | Owner: coldmind
Type: Bug | Status: assigned
Component: Migrations | Version: 1.7
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
----------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by coldmind):
{{{
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, this behavior is in conflict in South behavior and
can be annoying. What if I need to add few dozens of textfields, I will be
forced to type empty string for each of this field
<MarkusH> Django's migrations don't behave like south in many ways.
<MarkusH> be explicit and define a default on the field in the model
<MarkusH> I don't think this should be handled by the migration framework.
<mYk> MarkusH: did you see comment 5 L
<mYk> s/L/?/
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, for now I'm also doubt if it check should be in
autodetector. But, it is the known fact that default value for textfield
and charfield is empty string, and I think it should be used if user
didn't specified other default value. But where this check should be
placed?
<MarkusH> mYk: yes
<MarkusH> mYk: What if I have a custom field that inherits from neither
Char nor TextField but has the same internal type as CharField?
<truecoldmind> I asked you a question in a pullrequest - can we check for
internal type instead of class instance check?
<MarkusH> Checking for internal type shoudn't be done outside of backends,
imo
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, Seems reasonable. But what check in autodetecor
should be placed? We will need one
<MarkusH> gimme a sec. trying something out
<MarkusH> truecoldmind: https://dpaste.de/GmrV
<MarkusH> https://dpaste.de/4i0j
<MarkusH> maybe even skip the "self.blank"
<MarkusH> but I think that's a better way to go
<MarkusH> You'd need to figure out though what the implications of that
are
<MarkusH> changes to internal Django migrations
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, looks good, but what about autodetector?
<MarkusH> no change required
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, `field.has_default()`, of course.
<truecoldmind> What do you mean with " implications " ?
<MarkusH> yah
<MarkusH> What happens to projects that upgrade? Does this generate a new
migration file?
<MarkusH> Are there situations that might break?
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, thank you, I'll do some research. I will post that
chat log as comment to pull request.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/23405#comment:13>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-updates@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.c7635b0b4abc30d99a5cd9e6d6ac22be%40djangoproject.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
