On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 04:13, Daniel Greenfeld <[email protected]> wrote: >[...] >> The original reason -- that the admin isn't intended as a general >> purpose site, just a backend editing interface -- is still valid. I'm >> not in favor of trying to turn the admin into something that people >> will try to interpret as a publicly visible CMS. > > I agree 100%. The admin should remain the admin.
I look at the admin as "just another app" which provides a CRUD interface and happens to have lots of hooks and templates for customization. There are use cases without a backend/public differentiation - sometimes all you want is CRUD. There are numerous examples of models you want to be able to "C", "R" and "D" but not "U". Currently, there are three permissions - for "C", "U" and "D" - and the app respects these and adjusts the interface accordingly. Certain admin users may not be able to create or delete certain models. I don't see how "completing" this by adding a permission for "R" and adjusting the interface accordingly would make the admin something it isn't (or isn't "supposed to be"). I believe the advent of "ModelAdmin.readonly_fields" is a confirmation of this need. "R" and "U" are currently mixed together - there are reasons for why this is the case but I don't see the historic explanations holding up as reasons to leave it like that. Cheers, Danny -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. 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.
