Re: A second stab at an implementation of composite fields

2013-04-17 Thread Michal Petrucha
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 03:49:11AM -0700, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > The basic idea is that there is a new ForeignObject class. A > ForeignObject basically just takes a related model, and from_fields > and to_fields which are the names of the fields used for the relation. > Then, the ORM knows how

Re: A second stab at an implementation of composite fields

2013-04-17 Thread Anssi Kääriäinen
On 12 huhti, 18:34, Michal Petrucha wrote: > On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 07:35:45AM -0700, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > > On 12 huhti, 16:44, Michal Petrucha wrote: > > ForeignKeys have been changed a lot since 2012-11-04. The introduction > > of

Re: A second stab at an implementation of composite fields

2013-04-12 Thread Michal Petrucha
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 07:35:45AM -0700, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > On 12 huhti, 16:44, Michal Petrucha wrote: > ForeignKeys have been changed a lot since 2012-11-04. The introduction > of ForeignObject (which is base for ForeignKey) means that there is > support for

Re: A second stab at an implementation of composite fields

2013-04-12 Thread Anssi Kääriäinen
On 12 huhti, 16:44, Michal Petrucha wrote: > As far as relationship fields go, we tried to ignore them at first and > get back to them during the second half of GSoC. Two approaches were > considered, one was to special-case CompositeField targets in > ForeignKey and in

[GSoC 2013] A second stab at an implementation of composite fields

2013-04-12 Thread Michal Petrucha
Hello everyone, Hopefully some of you still remember me as the guy who's been trying to implement support for composite primary keys by means of composite model fields. I haven't provided a whole lot of information on the progress of this project for... quite a long time, so I'll try to rectify