2008/5/11 Peter Melvyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On 11 Kvě, 11:25, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Django has made a subtle change to the way a OneToOne field definition is > interpreted. > > This change makes sense, and is documented as being backwards incompatible. > > Yes, I agree and respect it. OTOH, this is no reason to generate SQL > command, which > > 1. is in contrary to MySQL reference guide > 2. introduces inconsistency (one may ask him/herself: why the hell > this PK is declared as UNIQUE whereas all others are not and PKs are > UNIQUE by the definition in 1NF :-?)
No argument here. However, this is unrelated to the issue that Django Evolution is currently having with the change to OneToOneField. > From this perspective it seems to me that Django should generate > correct DDL without redundant indeces etc... first Again, no argument here. Care to contribute a fix? :-) Yours, Russ Magee %-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
