On wo, 2010-07-28 at 14:20 -0500, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Dennis Kaarsemaker > <den...@kaarsemaker.net> wrote: > > As implemented in my github branch it is called once (well, twice, pre > > and post) per update() statement, not once per object. > > Okay, I missed that -- sorry. > > Doesn't really change how I feel about the feature, though: I don't > see the point in needlessly complicating what's supposed to be a very > thin wrapper around an UPDATE call. I haven't really heard a good > argument *for* the feature -- "I want it" isn't a great argument, and > there's already been a couple of suggestions to otherwise achieve the > feature.
But not yet a suggestion that integrates with third party applications without modifying them, which is one of the reasons I implemented this. (The other reasons basically come down to "i want it" as complete auditing, including update() is a requirement I have for a few projects) On the other hand, I see no reasons not to include the feature as it doesn't get in the way, is useful and comes with documentation and tests. It doesn't make update() more complicated to use and four lines of easy to understand code (2 for defining the signals and 2 for sending) are not difficult to understand either for people maintaining the code. -- Dennis K. They've gone to plaid! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
