I was also thinking of MetaModels or something instead of Options, as I
think it makes it more obvious what it's for.
On Friday, 1 August 2014 00:49:41 UTC+2, Josh Smeaton wrote:
>
> I was thinking "column" fields would make sense but it clashes with the
> internal concept of columns (Col types)
I was thinking "column" fields would make sense but it clashes with the
internal concept of columns (Col types), and is only name-appropriate for a
database backend. I'm not sure these are actually problems worth
considering though.
On Friday, 1 August 2014 01:07:21 UTC+10, Collin Anderson wrot
This is awesome. I've always wished that django.contrib.admin used only
documented django APIs. It's unfair to 3rd party apps. :) I'm also thankful
I won't need to import bitflags just to use this API.
> The Options API is at the core of Django, it enables introspection of
> Django Models wit
Hi Daniel,
First and foremost, thanks for all the good work, and for the clear and
precise updates and explanations on django-developers!
I think renaming related to reverse is a good idea, because it is much
clearer to me. Could reverse_rel become reverse_related in order not to use
abbreviat
Hi All,
I am currently working on the new Options API
(https://github.com/django/django/pull/2894).
The Options API is at the core of Django, it enables introspection of
Django Models with the rest of the system. This enables lookups, queries,
forms, admin to understand the capabilities of eve
