#36225: USERNAME_FIELD must be unique in order to use createsuperuser command
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Jonas Dittrich | Owner:
Type: | Abderrahmane MELEK
Cleanup/optimization | Status: assigned
Component: contrib.auth | Version: 5.1
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 Jacob Walls):
The plan from comment:3 to tweak the docs gives me pause, since this use
case was explicitly
[https://github.com/django/django/blob/4e7a991c12a113229e0927974d3bf94ea04eecf6/tests/auth_tests/models/invalid_models.py#L5
tested] and added in #24910.
From my reading of the forum post, the two sharp edges that came up for
the implementer were:
- reimplementing `AbstractBaseUser` from scratch to avoid having to `del
AbstractBaseUser.natural_key` to support serialization
- createsuperuser's username validation not being aware of `null=True,
distinct=True` username fields
We could tweak the docs instead to explain that `natural_key` must be
overridden on the model. The use case for nullable usernames and the
attendant weirdness around having to override `get_by_natural_key` on the
manager doesn't seem worth documenting to me: it could just be implicit
from the advice to "override".
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/36225#comment:8>
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 visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701991622d866-ff11d1be-2af0-4b92-a1d8-5c995f0618b2-000000%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.
