On 10/19/07, jdietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Can someone review the patch I've attached to ticket 3480 and verify > that it is sane? I think that should close out both #3480 and #3549, > and it seems a bit more kosher than the patch on #3549
It looks OK to me, rather along the lines of the check in many_to_many_sql_for_model(). There's a larger issue here, though -- from where they're used, I gather m2m_db_table, m2m_column_name, and m2m_reverse_name are intended to refer to the intermediate table belonging to a ManyToManyField; and I think there are a number of other bugs waiting to happen with GenericRelation's semantically different implementation. For example, django.core.management.sql.django_table_list() will return duplicate table names if a GenericRelation is used, and the oracle and postgres backends might have issues with sequences being created or reset more than once. And there are other places which could be hiding similar bugs. Should GenericRelation really implement m2m_*? Is there another, better way to enable its query lookups and joins without requiring an "if not isinstance" check in all code that examines ManyToMany fields and relations? A. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
