#35044: Accessing a deferred field clears reverse relations
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Adam Johnson | Owner: Giannis
| Terzopoulos
Type: Bug | Status: assigned
Component: Database layer | Version: dev
(models, ORM) |
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Simon Charette):
> Not sure how I would deal with the private fields though to be honest,
or if we actually need to handle that.
yeah not sure either, I suggest trying the same approach that avoids
clearing if `fields` is specified and the private field name is not part
of them. My only concern is that I'm not sure how `.only` will behave when
passed private field names. In all cases the only regression test existing
for #34137
[https://github.com/django/django/commit/123b1d3fcf79f091573c40be6da7113a6ef35b62
#diff-0e842fa4e4a689b120379780e62dc71a1476a409e21ccd09eac181ec5a2314d8R50
doesn't make use] of `fields` so it's in a grey area.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/35044#comment:3>
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 django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018d760e4dea-4f40e66b-f100-4063-9093-911121eb7e56-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
