Re: naming of a new test client method for logging in

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Tim Graham wrote: > There's a proposal [1] to add a new method to the test client that works > like login(), but skips the authentication (no credentials need to be > provided) and verification (is_active=False can login) steps. The signature

Re: naming of a new test client method for logging in

I second Andriy's comment. /Markus On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 04:41:06PM +0300, Andriy Sokolovskiy wrote: force_login() seems to be more clear what it going on inside On 6/30/15 16:38, Tim Graham wrote: There's a proposal [1] to add a new method to the test client that works like login(), but

Re: naming of a new test client method for logging in

force_login() seems to be more clear what it going on inside On 6/30/15 16:38, Tim Graham wrote: > There's a proposal [1] to add a new method to the test client that works > like login(), but skips the authentication (no credentials need to be > provided) and verification (is_active=False can

naming of a new test client method for logging in

There's a proposal [1] to add a new method to the test client that works like login(), but skips the authentication (no credentials need to be provided) and verification (is_active=False can login) steps. The signature is (user, backend=None). What would you name this method? Proposals so far: