On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 16:26 +0200, Loic Bistuer wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> I'm a little confused because if I understand correctly you introduced the
> concept of "data" field that you describe as "any field that has an entry on
> the database", but how is that different from the earlier concept of
Hi Daniel,
I'm a little confused because if I understand correctly you introduced the
concept of "data" field that you describe as "any field that has an entry on
the database", but how is that different from the earlier concept of "concrete"
fields.
For now FO, FK and O2O all fall under the "
On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 13:02 -0700, Daniel Pyrathon wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
> The current Options implementation has properties for "concrete
> fields".
> Technically speaking, concrete fields are data fields without a
> column.
Concrete fields are data fields *with* a column, not the other way
arou
Hi All,
The current Options implementation has properties for "concrete fields".
Technically speaking, concrete fields are data fields without a column. The
only concrete field in the codebase is ForeignObject. There are 2 classes
that inherit from ForeignObject: GenericRelation and ForeignKey,
