Re: ticket 5929

2023-01-10 Thread Barhamou Hama 
Hi, I'm glad I contributed to something. I understand your point of view. 
I'm new and looking for an interesting topic to work on in my spare time. 
I don't want to waste my energy on a feature that doesn't get a lot of 
support.
However, if this ticket still exists, there must be a problem somewhere.
Le mardi 10 janvier 2023 à 15:23:35 UTC+1, tob...@caktusgroup.com a écrit :

> Thank you Barhamou for raising the question here and starting the 
> discussion.
>
> I agree with Adrian that this feels like a pretty niche use case.  
> Depending on the needs, other possible implementations might include:
>
> 4. A form field mapping to multiple model fields
> 5. A custom queryset/manager that takes "shorthand filter queries" and 
> expands them to multiple model fields
>
> As for the example in #5929  
> ticket 
> description, that is probably best solved with #2 on Adrian's list, for 
> example the django-netfields  
> project 
> for Postgres.
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 9:59 AM Barhamou Hama  wrote:
>
>> Hence the interest of my question, if in 15 years it has not been solved, 
>> there must be a reason.
>>
>> Le lundi 9 janvier 2023 à 12:57:31 UTC+1, ator...@redhat.com a écrit :
>>
>>> I feel like this is a very niche use case and probably doesn't warrant 
>>> implementing field-to-column one-to-many relationships in Django, I don't 
>>> see why this specific case can't be implemented as:
>>>
>>> 1. A model that implements the data type
>>> 2. A custom field + custom datatype on the database backend
>>> 3. ArrayField [1] if using postgres
>>>
>>> [1] 
>>> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.1/ref/contrib/postgres/fields/#arrayfield
>>> On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 12:16:56 AM UTC+1 cur...@tinbrain.net 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, 8 Jan 2023, at 23:29, Barhamou Hama wrote:

 Hi all, I came across this ticket here 
  opened 15 years ago that 
 doesn't seem to have been resolved. I decided to work on it. But in 15 
 years a lot can happen. Is it still relevant? Has there been any progress 
 on this issue?
  


 IIRC there's no current support for this, the closest being 
 GenericForeignKeys, which still require their sub-fields defined 
 separately.

 There has been posts about supporting joint using multi-field keys (
 https://devblog.kogan.com/blog/custom-relationships-in-django) 
 however, that's a rather specific case.

 I think it would be a good thing for progress on this issue to happen.

 You might also want to check the ticket history for any work on 
 multi-value keys.

 --
 Curtis


 -- 
>> 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 django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9e4ee8c9-aa22-4ac1-bd70-1c87427ca955n%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>

-- 
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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0fa26341-edf0-4b98-8ca1-042162978953n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: ticket 5929

2023-01-10 Thread 'Tobias McNulty' via Django developers (Contributions to Django itself) 
Thank you Barhamou for raising the question here and starting the
discussion.

I agree with Adrian that this feels like a pretty niche use case.
Depending on the needs, other possible implementations might include:

4. A form field mapping to multiple model fields
5. A custom queryset/manager that takes "shorthand filter queries" and
expands them to multiple model fields

As for the example in #5929  ticket
description, that is probably best solved with #2 on Adrian's list, for
example the django-netfields
 project
for Postgres.

On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 9:59 AM Barhamou Hama  wrote:

> Hence the interest of my question, if in 15 years it has not been solved,
> there must be a reason.
>
> Le lundi 9 janvier 2023 à 12:57:31 UTC+1, ator...@redhat.com a écrit :
>
>> I feel like this is a very niche use case and probably doesn't warrant
>> implementing field-to-column one-to-many relationships in Django, I don't
>> see why this specific case can't be implemented as:
>>
>> 1. A model that implements the data type
>> 2. A custom field + custom datatype on the database backend
>> 3. ArrayField [1] if using postgres
>>
>> [1]
>> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.1/ref/contrib/postgres/fields/#arrayfield
>> On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 12:16:56 AM UTC+1 cur...@tinbrain.net
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 8 Jan 2023, at 23:29, Barhamou Hama wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all, I came across this ticket here
>>>  opened 15 years ago that
>>> doesn't seem to have been resolved. I decided to work on it. But in 15
>>> years a lot can happen. Is it still relevant? Has there been any progress
>>> on this issue?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IIRC there's no current support for this, the closest being
>>> GenericForeignKeys, which still require their sub-fields defined separately.
>>>
>>> There has been posts about supporting joint using multi-field keys (
>>> https://devblog.kogan.com/blog/custom-relationships-in-django) however,
>>> that's a rather specific case.
>>>
>>> I think it would be a good thing for progress on this issue to happen.
>>>
>>> You might also want to check the ticket history for any work on
>>> multi-value keys.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Curtis
>>>
>>>
>>> --
> 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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9e4ee8c9-aa22-4ac1-bd70-1c87427ca955n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMGFDKRDeF-VqnYg%2BHmTYo-pT1QyG61dUKKqm3Ai_jSKnb984g%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: ticket 5929

2023-01-09 Thread Barhamou Hama 
Hence the interest of my question, if in 15 years it has not been solved, 
there must be a reason.

Le lundi 9 janvier 2023 à 12:57:31 UTC+1, ator...@redhat.com a écrit :

> I feel like this is a very niche use case and probably doesn't warrant 
> implementing field-to-column one-to-many relationships in Django, I don't 
> see why this specific case can't be implemented as:
>
> 1. A model that implements the data type
> 2. A custom field + custom datatype on the database backend
> 3. ArrayField [1] if using postgres
>
> [1] 
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.1/ref/contrib/postgres/fields/#arrayfield
> On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 12:16:56 AM UTC+1 cur...@tinbrain.net wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 8 Jan 2023, at 23:29, Barhamou Hama wrote:
>>
>> Hi all, I came across this ticket here 
>>  opened 15 years ago that 
>> doesn't seem to have been resolved. I decided to work on it. But in 15 
>> years a lot can happen. Is it still relevant? Has there been any progress 
>> on this issue?
>>  
>>
>>
>> IIRC there's no current support for this, the closest being 
>> GenericForeignKeys, which still require their sub-fields defined separately.
>>
>> There has been posts about supporting joint using multi-field keys (
>> https://devblog.kogan.com/blog/custom-relationships-in-django) however, 
>> that's a rather specific case.
>>
>> I think it would be a good thing for progress on this issue to happen.
>>
>> You might also want to check the ticket history for any work on 
>> multi-value keys.
>>
>> --
>> Curtis
>>
>>
>>

-- 
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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9e4ee8c9-aa22-4ac1-bd70-1c87427ca955n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: ticket 5929

2023-01-09 Thread Barhamou Hama 

Thanks, I will study the question to find out more.
Le lundi 9 janvier 2023 à 00:16:56 UTC+1, cur...@tinbrain.net a écrit :

> On Sun, 8 Jan 2023, at 23:29, Barhamou Hama wrote:
>
> Hi all, I came across this ticket here 
>  opened 15 years ago that 
> doesn't seem to have been resolved. I decided to work on it. But in 15 
> years a lot can happen. Is it still relevant? Has there been any progress 
> on this issue?
>  
>
>
> IIRC there's no current support for this, the closest being 
> GenericForeignKeys, which still require their sub-fields defined separately.
>
> There has been posts about supporting joint using multi-field keys (
> https://devblog.kogan.com/blog/custom-relationships-in-django) however, 
> that's a rather specific case.
>
> I think it would be a good thing for progress on this issue to happen.
>
> You might also want to check the ticket history for any work on 
> multi-value keys.
>
> --
> Curtis
>
>
>

-- 
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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/11026962-3768-47f5-91bb-7aab8150165en%40googlegroups.com.

Re: ticket 5929

2023-01-09 Thread Adrian Torres 
I feel like this is a very niche use case and probably doesn't warrant 
implementing field-to-column one-to-many relationships in Django, I don't 
see why this specific case can't be implemented as:

1. A model that implements the data type
2. A custom field + custom datatype on the database backend
3. ArrayField [1] if using postgres

[1] 
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.1/ref/contrib/postgres/fields/#arrayfield
On Monday, January 9, 2023 at 12:16:56 AM UTC+1 cur...@tinbrain.net wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Jan 2023, at 23:29, Barhamou Hama wrote:
>
> Hi all, I came across this ticket here 
>  opened 15 years ago that 
> doesn't seem to have been resolved. I decided to work on it. But in 15 
> years a lot can happen. Is it still relevant? Has there been any progress 
> on this issue?
>  
>
>
> IIRC there's no current support for this, the closest being 
> GenericForeignKeys, which still require their sub-fields defined separately.
>
> There has been posts about supporting joint using multi-field keys (
> https://devblog.kogan.com/blog/custom-relationships-in-django) however, 
> that's a rather specific case.
>
> I think it would be a good thing for progress on this issue to happen.
>
> You might also want to check the ticket history for any work on 
> multi-value keys.
>
> --
> Curtis
>
>
>

-- 
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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/6b636002-3eb9-44f3-9510-89d7319f8231n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: ticket 5929

2023-01-08 Thread Curtis Maloney 
On Sun, 8 Jan 2023, at 23:29, Barhamou Hama wrote:
> Hi all, I came across this ticket here 
>  opened 15 years ago that doesn't 
> seem to have been resolved. I decided to work on it. But in 15 years a lot 
> can happen. Is it still relevant? Has there been any progress on this issue?
>  

IIRC there's no current support for this, the closest being GenericForeignKeys, 
which still require their sub-fields defined separately.

There has been posts about supporting joint using multi-field keys 
(https://devblog.kogan.com/blog/custom-relationships-in-django) however, that's 
a rather specific case.

I think it would be a good thing for progress on this issue to happen.

You might also want to check the ticket history for any work on multi-value 
keys.

--
Curtis

-- 
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 django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/9f8cb18e-038c-4fe3-8858-6cd23adda769%40app.fastmail.com.