what would the use cases be? On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick <malc...@pointy-stick.com > wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 04:53 -0700, Adys wrote: > > I made a small patch for my local Django install to be able to precise > > add_constraint=False (default True, normal behaviour) to FKeys/ > > M2Ms/... > > As the tin says, it prevents index/constraint creation for that field. > > I won't bother going through the use cases for this; I know I need it > > and maybe other people too. > > No, actually the only way something like this is ever going to get into > Django is precisely because there are compelling use-cases. "I need it" > is not a compelling use-case, because the only way I can currently think > of needing this is if somebody is trying to change the very meaning of > what one-to-one and foreign key relations are (e.g. the recent > discussion about wanting non-unique one-to-one fields, which is > basically a contradication in terms). You might be after some effect > that is better achieved by not using these particular relational fields > and adding an option to those fields simply to achieve those effects > isn't a solution to any problem. > > This isn't likely to get a lot of eyeballs and consideration until after > 1.1 in any case, but at that time, you probably want to have explain > these use-cases and why you aren't changing the very meaning of the > relation fields. > > Regards, > Malcolm > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
