Re: [Django] #31507: Augment QuerySet.exists() optimizations to .union().exists().

[Django]

#31507: Augment QuerySet.exists() optimizations to .union().exists().
-+-
 Reporter:  Simon Charette   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:   |   Status:  new
  Cleanup/optimization   |
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * stage:  Unreviewed => Accepted


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/067.b7ce9e31d8116a03cfae8f91ff9fb57a%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31506: ExpressionWrapper() doesn't respect output_field when combining DateField and timedelta on PostgreSQL and MySQL.

[Django]

#31506: ExpressionWrapper() doesn't respect output_field when combining 
DateField
and timedelta on PostgreSQL and MySQL.
-+-
 Reporter:  Matthieu Rigal   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  new
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * Attachment "test_31506.diff" added.


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.ddd6c685ecb6c6eea86757b599830563%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31506: ExpressionWrapper() doesn't respect output_field when combining DateField and timedelta on PostgreSQL and MySQL. (was: ExpressionWrapper on DateField + timedelta always returns Da

[Django]

#31506: ExpressionWrapper() doesn't respect output_field when combining 
DateField
and timedelta on PostgreSQL and MySQL.
-+-
 Reporter:  Matthieu Rigal   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  new
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * cc: Josh Smeaton (added)
 * version:  2.2 => master
 * stage:  Unreviewed => Accepted


Comment:

 Thanks for this ticket. I reproduced this issue on MySQL and PostgreSQL. I
 attached a simple test.

 Reproduced at 060d9d4229c436c44cf8e3a301f34c4b1f9f6c85.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.b21f2bcd945a58838ec083a323da573f%40djangoproject.com.

[Django] #31508: ASGI Lifespan Support

[Django]

#31508: ASGI Lifespan Support
-+
   Reporter:  braunsonm  |  Owner:  nobody
   Type:  Uncategorized  | Status:  new
  Component:  Uncategorized  |Version:  3.0
   Severity:  Normal |   Keywords:
   Triage Stage:  Unreviewed |  Has patch:  0
Needs documentation:  0  |Needs tests:  0
Patch needs improvement:  0  |  Easy pickings:  0
  UI/UX:  0  |
-+
 Hello, I am deploying my website with Uvicorn and I know I get warnings
 that ASGI Lifespan is not supported in the Django project.

 I was wondering if this was on the roadmap or if I could update the docs
 in some way? Thanks.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/052.aca8ccf2321326c46a6e12940b39f874%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #23318: Management command dbshell does not use DATABASE[...]['OPTIONS'] to set env PGOPTIONS

[Django]

#23318: Management command dbshell does not use DATABASE[...]['OPTIONS'] to set 
env
PGOPTIONS
-+-
 Reporter:  benjaoming   |Owner:  Flavio
 |  Curella
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Core (Management |  Version:  master
  commands)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  1
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Dulmandakh):

 Replying to [comment:8 felixxm]:
 > Replying to [comment:7 Dulmandakh]:
 > >  may be used to set many connection configurations of psycopg2
 other than **options** or PGOPTIONS.
 >
 > I'm not sure what does it mean? You want to pass `options` to the
 `PGOPTIONS` so how it can support sth else? The list of all available
 options can be found in [https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/runtime-
 config.html the PostgreSQL docs]. Also I'm not sure
 ([https://github.com/django/django/pull/3168#issuecomment-55174417 as
 pointed by Tim]) if passing all possible options is safe.

 IIRC, OPTIONS passed to
 [https://www.psycopg.org/docs/module.html#psycopg2.connect
 psycopg2.connect] method directly as a part of kwargs, so it might be best
 to not interfere with it. Also we cannot determine which options are safe
 or not, so it might be best to leave it a web developer to decide.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/068.54da3190191aecb0467328e4e826b12b%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #24691: Document model._state.adding (since UUIDField sets value before save)

[Django]

#24691: Document model._state.adding (since UUIDField sets value before save)
-+-
 Reporter:  Mattia Procopio  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:   |   Status:  closed
  Cleanup/optimization   |
Component:  Documentation|  Version:  1.8
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  duplicate
 Keywords:  uuid UUIDField   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => duplicate


Comment:

 Duplicate of #31502.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/069.d235bb53b9725255be06f619a1a98ea0%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31502: Document Model._state.db and Model._state.adding. (was: Document Model._state)

[Django]

#31502: Document Model._state.db and Model._state.adding.
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam (Chainz)|Owner:  nobody
  Johnson|
 Type:   |   Status:  new
  Cleanup/optimization   |
Component:  Documentation|  Version:  master
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * component:  Database layer (models, ORM) => Documentation
 * stage:  Unreviewed => Accepted


Comment:

 I think we should document `db` and `adding` attributes of `Model._state`
 instead of `Model._state`  itself.

 I closed #24691 as a duplicate because it mentions only
 `Model._state.adding`, and we can handle both in a single ticket.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/068.281c8a8e715810d30717408b88cbad84%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31496: Combined queryset crash when chaining `values()` after `order_by()` with annotated constantants.

[Django]

#31496: Combined queryset crash when chaining `values()` after `order_by()` with
annotated constantants.
-+-
 Reporter:  GardenLee|Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  new
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  3.0
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Hasan Ramezani):

 I take a look and here is my understanding:

 In this case, when we order queryset by annotated value(`bar_val`) the
 
[https://github.com/django/django/blob/060d9d4229c436c44cf8e3a301f34c4b1f9f6c85/django/db/models/sql/compiler.py#L374
 src] variable,  has type `` and `src.output_field.name
 is None`.
 So,
 
[https://github.com/django/django/blob/060d9d4229c436c44cf8e3a301f34c4b1f9f6c85/django/db/models/sql/query.py#L1832
 add_select_col function] adds `None` to `values_select`.

 we should somehow add `bar_val` to the `values_select`.

 @felixxm, If you have any workaround, I can prepare a patch.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.83fa50379539ca4ad894fa168ee50591%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31504: Allow makemigrations to skip database consistency checks

[Django]

#31504: Allow makemigrations to skip database consistency checks
-+--
 Reporter:  Tom Forbes   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations   |  Version:  3.0
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  1|UI/UX:  0
-+--
Changes (by Ian Bottomley):

 * cc: Ian Bottomley (added)


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/061.5269fed884193546951e26392b92e7df%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31503: Moving a unique constraint from unique_together to Field.unique generate an invalid migration.

[Django]

#31503: Moving a unique constraint from unique_together to Field.unique 
generate an
invalid migration.
-+-
 Reporter:  Xiang Wang   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations   |  Version:  3.0
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  unique_together  | Triage Stage:  Accepted
  unique migrations  |
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Xiang Wang):

 I think we can consider limit the length of unique_together. If a user set
 unique_together containing only one field, we can raise an error and ask
 him to use unique=True instead.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.3ff4313bc30a1e3371572048edb275cb%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31503: Moving a unique constraint from unique_together to Field.unique generate an invalid migration. (was: I met a problem when I convert a unique_together to the unique=True attribute.

[Django]

#31503: Moving a unique constraint from unique_together to Field.unique 
generate an
invalid migration.
-+-
 Reporter:  Xiang Wang   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations   |  Version:  3.0
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  unique_together  | Triage Stage:  Accepted
  unique migrations  |
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Simon Charette):

 * stage:  Unreviewed => Accepted


Comment:

 Thank your for your report.

 I guess this is a bug in the auto-detector where the `AlterUniqueTogether`
 should appear before the `AlterField` that adds the `Field.unique=True`. I
 assume this is the case because `generate_altered_unique_together` is run
 after `generate_altered_fields` and the former doesn't add any
 dependencies on ensure operations are properly re-ordered.

 Not sure it's worth adjusting `AddConstraint` ordering as well since the
 chance of adding a `UniqueConstraint` with a colliding `.name` are really
 slim.

 Xiang, can you confirm that re-ordering your operations so that
 `AlterUniqueTogether` is performed before `AlterField` addresses your
 issue?

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.1379d4741abf6e7ca5cf94761ad9%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31503: I met a problem when I convert a unique_together to the unique=True attribute.

[Django]

#31503: I met a problem when I convert a unique_together to the unique=True
attribute.
-+-
 Reporter:  ramwin   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations   |  Version:  3.0
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  unique_together  | Triage Stage:
  unique migrations  |  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by ramwin):

 * Attachment "testunique.tar.gz" added.

 this is a small project which can repeat the bug.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.31f2671503262eeeb55197906bed00bd%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #30796: Chaining select_related mutates original QuerySet.

[Django]

#30796: Chaining select_related mutates original QuerySet.
-+-
 Reporter:  Darren Maki  |Owner:  Simon
 |  Charette
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  2.2
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:  select_related   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
  prefetch_related mutate queryset   |
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Simon Charette):

 It's already released in Django 3.0 and won't be backported to 2.2 LTS
 since this bug has been around for a few years before getting identified
 and thus isn't a recent regression.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/070.ccc1e3878e65eee03c8f40ad7cc7e687%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #30796: Chaining select_related mutates original QuerySet.

[Django]

#30796: Chaining select_related mutates original QuerySet.
-+-
 Reporter:  Darren Maki  |Owner:  Simon
 |  Charette
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  2.2
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:  select_related   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
  prefetch_related mutate queryset   |
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Alexander Klimenko):

 Are there any plans of releasing this fix?

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/070.b319c670ea88369f424cab5c00c15b32%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31483: Remove admin change_form.js dependency on jQuery.

[Django]

#31483: Remove admin change_form.js dependency on jQuery.
-+-
 Reporter:  Jon Dufresne |Owner:  Jon
 Type:   |  Dufresne
  Cleanup/optimization   |   Status:  assigned
Component:  contrib.admin|  Version:  master
 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 Carlton Gibson ):

 In [changeset:"a8bb53dbd24c90c280e90332d9a1f9f64efde3c7" a8bb53db]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="a8bb53dbd24c90c280e90332d9a1f9f64efde3c7"
 Refs #31483 -- Removed CSS and JavaScript for unused HTML class add-
 another.

 The HTML class was removed in 07988744b347302925bc6cc66511e34224db55ab.
 As such, the CSS and JavaScript is unused.
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/067.f350b9401de88632b60e6b18a5844c08%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31500: Allow QuerySet.in_bulk() for fields with total UniqueConstraints.

[Django]

#31500: Allow QuerySet.in_bulk() for fields with total UniqueConstraints.
-+-
 Reporter:  Hannes Ljungberg |Owner:  Hannes
 |  Ljungberg
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Hannes Ljungberg):

 PR: https://github.com/django/django/pull/12774

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/067.09b7625f6866c5457d495aef869ba5af%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #21906: dumpdata should not use router.allow_migrate

[Django]

#21906: dumpdata should not use router.allow_migrate
-+-
 Reporter:  yscumc   |Owner:  Hasan
 |  Ramezani
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Core (Management |  Version:  master
  commands)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  1
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * needs_better_patch:  0 => 1
 * version:  1.5 => master


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.7c4b3e1ce69ddf03b213ed3eabf27915%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31501: Update Documentation for "Testing Responses" section on Django Documentation

[Django]

#31501: Update Documentation for "Testing Responses" section on Django
Documentation
-+-
 Reporter:  AvuGradConnection|Owner:  nobody
 Type:   |   Status:  new
  Cleanup/optimization   |
Component:  Documentation|  Version:  2.2
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  Documentation,   | Triage Stage:
  Testing, Responses, Testing|  Unreviewed
  Client, TestClient, Django Rest|
  Framework, DRF, API's, Custom  |
  Views  |
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  1
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  1|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by AvuGradConnection):

 * cc: AvuGradConnection (added)
 * needs_docs:  0 => 1


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/075.65b583d5156f9d0978401dc1171a176c%40djangoproject.com.

[Django] #31501: Update Documentation for "Testing Responses" section on Django Documentation

[Django]

#31501: Update Documentation for "Testing Responses" section on Django
Documentation
-+-
   Reporter: |  Owner:  nobody
  AvuGradConnection  |
   Type: | Status:  new
  Cleanup/optimization   |
  Component: |Version:  2.2
  Documentation  |   Keywords:  Documentation,
   Severity:  Normal |  Testing, Responses, Testing Client,
 |  TestClient, Django Rest Framework,
   Triage Stage: |  DRF, API's, Custom Views
  Unreviewed |  Has patch:  0
Needs documentation:  0  |Needs tests:  0
Patch needs improvement:  0  |  Easy pickings:  1
  UI/UX:  0  |
-+-
 https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.2/topics/testing/tools/#testing-
 responses

 Under the Testing Responses section of this page, it is detailed to the
 user how to interact with the "Response" object returned from the client
 request. There is an assumption made that the response will be a
 'django.http.response.HttpResponse' (HttpResponse) whereas the endpoint
 responsible for returning the response may/may not return a response
 object that is an HttpResponse, or even a response like object at all.

 Users should be made aware of this and the fact that the interface
 described for communicating with the response might be significantly
 different depending on what type of response the view handling the
 response returns. This may or may not be a response like object. The user
 should be made aware that if they are using any other mechanism besides
 Django default views to return response objects then the response may
 differ significantly from the the documentation interface explained.

 **Example**: Django Rest Framework, manipulates(sub classes) the
 HttpResponse in providing their "ApiViews" and this response object works
 slightly differently from the class HttpResponse object described in the
 documentation.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/060.7256b9aafebb59377d04ff90cb288df6%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31500: Allow QuerySet.in_bulk() for fields with total UniqueConstraints. (was: Allow in_bulk() for fields with UniqueConstraint)

[Django]

#31500: Allow QuerySet.in_bulk() for fields with total UniqueConstraints.
-+-
 Reporter:  Hannes Ljungberg |Owner:  Hannes
 |  Ljungberg
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * stage:  Unreviewed => Accepted


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/067.1bdf9bc472541cf94b5aab32fd21501b%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31486: Deprecate passing unsaved objects to related filters.

[Django]

#31486: Deprecate passing unsaved objects to related filters.
-+-
 Reporter:  Mapiarz  |Owner:  Hasan
 |  Ramezani
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  1
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * cc: Simon Charette (added)
 * needs_better_patch:  0 => 1


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/065.9364ce9db032e45fdf46a85c93560286%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #20581: Support DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERRED for UNIQUE constraints

[Django]

#20581: Support DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERRED for UNIQUE constraints
-+-
 Reporter:  dmadeley@…   |Owner:  Ian Foote
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  master
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  db-indexes   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  1
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by felixxm):

 * needs_better_patch:  0 => 1


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/085.7a5b68f4e6c01436807cc4701c33a3d4%40djangoproject.com.

Re: [Django] #31499: Store ModeState.fields into a dict.

[Django]

#31499: Store ModeState.fields into a dict.
-+-
 Reporter:  Simon Charette   |Owner:  Simon
 Type:   |  Charette
  Cleanup/optimization   |   Status:  closed
Component:  Migrations   |  Version:  master
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak ):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 In [changeset:"06889d62063f0d12aaf618101dfc1b07333117be" 06889d62]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="06889d62063f0d12aaf618101dfc1b07333117be"
 Fixed #31499 -- Stored ModelState.fields into a dict.

 This allows the removal of its O(n) .get_field_by_name method and many
 other awkward access patterns.

 While fields were initially stored in a list to preserve the initial
 model definiton field ordering the auto-detector doesn't take field
 ordering into account and no operations exists to reorder fields of a
 model.

 This makes the preservation of the field ordering completely superflous
 because field reorganization after the creation of the model state
 wouldn't be taken into account.
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/067.d4f9235b1431a5d5ee95785b62b39e92%40djangoproject.com.