#23405: Blank-able CharFields require default=''
----------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: yuvadm | Owner: coldmind
Type: Bug | Status: assigned
Component: Migrations | Version: 1.7
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 1 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
----------------------------+------------------------------------
Comment (by coldmind):
{{{
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, this behavior is in conflict in South behavior and
can be annoying. What if I need to add few dozens of textfields, I will be
forced to type empty string for each of this field
<MarkusH> Django's migrations don't behave like south in many ways.
<MarkusH> be explicit and define a default on the field in the model
<MarkusH> I don't think this should be handled by the migration framework.
<mYk> MarkusH: did you see comment 5 L
<mYk> s/L/?/
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, for now I'm also doubt if it check should be in
autodetector. But, it is the known fact that default value for textfield
and charfield is empty string, and I think it should be used if user
didn't specified other default value. But where this check should be
placed?
<MarkusH> mYk: yes
<MarkusH> mYk: What if I have a custom field that inherits from neither
Char nor TextField but has the same internal type as CharField?
<truecoldmind> I asked you a question in a pullrequest - can we check for
internal type instead of class instance check?
<MarkusH> Checking for internal type shoudn't be done outside of backends,
imo
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, Seems reasonable. But what check in autodetecor
should be placed? We will need one
<MarkusH> gimme a sec. trying something out
<MarkusH> truecoldmind: https://dpaste.de/GmrV
<MarkusH> https://dpaste.de/4i0j
<MarkusH> maybe even skip the "self.blank"
<MarkusH> but I think that's a better way to go
<MarkusH> You'd need to figure out though what the implications of that
are
<MarkusH> changes to internal Django migrations
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, looks good, but what about autodetector?
<MarkusH> no change required
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, `field.has_default()`, of course.
<truecoldmind> What do you mean with " implications " ?
<MarkusH> yah
<MarkusH> What happens to projects that upgrade? Does this generate a new
migration file?
<MarkusH> Are there situations that might break?
<truecoldmind> MarkusH, thank you, I'll do some research. I will post that
chat log as comment to pull request.
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/23405#comment:13>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/064.c7635b0b4abc30d99a5cd9e6d6ac22be%40djangoproject.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
