Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Odd. We should really save the "through" attribute on the m2m field itself. Maybe in 1.9... On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 8:33:58 AM UTC-6, Tom Christie wrote: > > Thanks Russ, appreciate your time. > > I've no great problem with keeping 'through' table API undocumented with > 1.8, probably

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Thanks Russ, appreciate your time. I've no great problem with keeping 'through' table API undocumented with 1.8, probably doesn't matter too much either way. Just flagging it up, but looks like 'no change' there, which is okay. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

On 12/22/2014 06:04 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: [snipped agreement on many things!] > I'd argue whether a mixin is needed at all. At present, the mixin is only > used on Field, GenericForeignKey and RelatedObject. RelatedObject will > potentially be deleted; that leaves 2 classes. Every field

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Hi Tom, On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Tom Christie wrote: > > One thing I'm unclear on: Does the new API contain any (public API) way of > determining if a relationship has an associated through table? > > Entirely possible that I'm being stupid and that's outside the

Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

One thing I'm unclear on: Does the new API contain any (public API) way of determining if a relationship has an associated through table? Entirely possible that I'm being stupid and that's outside the scope of the API, but it's the one thing I see in Django REST framework's ModelSerializer

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Carl Meyer wrote: > > Hi Russell, > > Many thanks to Daniel, and to you, for all the work on this PR! > > On 12/22/2014 12:39 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > * get_fields(include_parents=True, include_hidden=False) > > > > Returns a list of

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Hi Russell, Many thanks to Daniel, and to you, for all the work on this PR! On 12/22/2014 12:39 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > * get_fields(include_parents=True, include_hidden=False) > > Returns a list of fields associated with a model. > > include_parents controls whether the list of

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Hey folks, On Monday, December 22, 2014 3:29:15 PM UTC+1, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > > Hi Russell, > > 2014-12-22 8:39 GMT+01:00 Russell Keith-Magee >: > >> The question: Do we - >> >> 1) Accept this particular internal specific naming of GFK as a quirk >> reflecting

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Hi all, Just to add a data point regarding virtual fields. We're using them in production in our open source media library ( https://github.com/onefinestay/django-mediacat/blob/master/mediacat/fields.py#L97-L119). Essentially, due to a number of issues, it wasn't practical to have references to

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Ditto. I'm ok with a tiny shim for GFK, and we should get the API right for RelatedObject going forward, (as long as it's at least _possible_ to detect which is which and write code that works on both 1.7 and 1.8). On Monday, December 22, 2014 9:29:15 AM UTC-5, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > > Hi

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Hi Russell, 2014-12-22 8:39 GMT+01:00 Russell Keith-Magee : > The question: Do we - > > 1) Accept this particular internal specific naming of GFK as a quirk > reflecting the limitations of contrib.admin > > 2) Try to nail down what a "virtual" field means, or find some

Re: Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

My votes for the "do we" issues are that we can leave gfk for internal usage. In some senses gfks really are a category of their own. For the RelatedObject issue I think we should accept the backwards incompatible change. In the long run I think we should aim for a situation where "RelatedObject"

Delivering PR 3114 - The _meta refactor

Hi all, The deadline for 1.8 alpha is rapidly approaching, and one of the features that has been proposed for inclusion is Daniel Pyrathon's GSoC project refactoring the _meta object. A huge thanks to Tim, Carl, Collin, Loïc, Anssi, and everyone else that has provided detailed reviews and