Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-11 Thread Ned Batchelder
Done: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2698 --Ned. Russell Keith-Magee wrote: On 9/10/06, Ned Batchelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No filtering allowed. Hrm. I think you might be right. Taking a closer look, it seems that the deletion algorithm is fairly conservat

Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-11 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On 9/10/06, Ned Batchelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No filtering allowed. Hrm. I think you might be right. Taking a closer look, it seems that the deletion algorithm is fairly conservative; I can't see a way of constructing a non-default related manager that would exclude an object from delet

Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-09 Thread Ned Batchelder
Russell Keith-Magee wrote: On 9/9/06, Ned Batchelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: I'm not familiar with the internals of this code, but here's a naive conception: since the default objects manager is made automatically by the ORM, couldn't it still be ava

Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-09 Thread JP
> Consider a weblog app with an Entry model and a Category model: > > * An Entry can be either "live" or "draft". > * There's a many-to-many relation between Entry and Category. [snip (paraphrased) altering the default manager breaks admin, but it's necessary to change how related fields do their

Re: Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-09 Thread James Bennett
On 9/9/06, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thinking a little higher level, it feels like we should be avoiding the idea > of a 'default' manager as much as possible. We let people define multiple > managers, but we fall back to the default far too often. Agreed; there are a coupl

Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-08 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On 9/9/06, Ned Batchelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: I'm not familiar with the internals of this code, but here's a naive conception: since the default objects manager is made automatically by the ORM, couldn't it still be available internally for use in this case?  Whatever filtering

Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-08 Thread Ned Batchelder
Russell Keith-Magee wrote: On 9/8/06, Ned Batchelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The docs for custom managers say: "it's generally a good idea for the first Manager to be relatively unfiltered".  But it seems that any filtering in the default manager will interfere with cascading deletes.

Re: Custom default managers interfere with delete operations

2006-09-08 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On 9/8/06, Ned Batchelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The docs for custom managers say: "it's generally a good idea for thefirst Manager to be relatively unfiltered".  But it seems that anyfiltering in the default manager will interfere with cascading deletes. Having a filtered manager will cause s