On Oct 9, 4:41 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> However, any of these plans hinge on us determining the right behavior
> in the first place. Like I said last time -- I really need to hear
> other opinions on this.
Bumping this up (#10227). Btw the other two tickets (#14043, #14368)
are RFC; woul
On Oct 9, 5:41 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> > I'll try to come up with patches+tests for #14043 and #14368 since
> > they strike you as bugs. As for #10227, what do you think about my
> > suggestion at the end for a new optional 'related_default' parameter ?
>
> I'm not sold on related_defaul
On Oct 8, 2:20 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> #14043 is clearly a bug to me (hence the accepted status). If I had to
> guess at a cause, I'd say it's either:
> * The OneToOneField special case not being handled by deletion traversal
> * The related object cache on the o2o field not being clea
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 5:13 PM, George Sakkis wrote:
> Thanks for the thorough reply, it was helpful, even without replying
> directly to any of the specific questions about the leakiness of the
> abstraction :-)
Damn. You noticed :-)
> I'll try to come up with patches+tests for #14043 and #1436
Thanks for the thorough reply, it was helpful, even without replying
directly to any of the specific questions about the leakiness of the
abstraction :-)
I'll try to come up with patches+tests for #14043 and #14368 since
they strike you as bugs. As for #10227, what do you think about my
suggestion
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:30 PM, George Sakkis wrote:
> There are at least three open tickets related to OneToOneFields
> (#10227, #14043, #14368) that, even if deemed invalid, hint at lack of
> adequate documentation. After reading the docs on OneToOneField, I
> don't think one can easily answer t
There are at least three open tickets related to OneToOneFields
(#10227, #14043, #14368) that, even if deemed invalid, hint at lack of
adequate documentation. After reading the docs on OneToOneField, I
don't think one can easily answer the following questions:
- It is mentioned that multi-table in
