Reading the history, I see an awful lot of -1s to the idea of a default.
I see “use a TextField” and “use a subclass” a few times, which were my
immediate thoughts just on the recent emails.
On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 18:47, Tom Forbes wrote:
> I’m not a fan of implicit max_lengths. Is having to ad
I’m not a fan of implicit max_lengths. Is having to add a keyword argument to a
model field really that much of a burden? And we also would likely never be
able to change the default without headaches.
> On 12 Aug 2020, at 13:19, t...@carrick.eu wrote:
>
> I'd like to revive this discussion an
Hi!
I think you've found the wrong mailing list for this post. This mailing
list is for discussing the development of Django itself, not for support
using Django. This means the discussions of bugs and features in Django
itself, rather than in your code using it. People on this list are unlikely
t
I used to define my User model that run with initally (Tested very good),
then I want to import REST framework to deal with urls and views, but it
looks like friendly with Django's User model but not me... So I am think
that is it a good idea to add it (I remove the auth App at frist), and then
My 2 cents as a non core developer.
On Wednesday, August 12, 2020, t...@carrick.eu wrote:
>
>
> Give CharField a default max_length that is consistent across all vendors.
> It doesn't really matter what the number is other than that it should be
> large enough to be useful but small enough to wor
