@dalley you're right: we can't use ! in field names since these field names are used in the bindings and ! is a special character in many languages (including Python).
I've closed out the django-rest-framework-filters PR. This PR should be ready for review: https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/452 David On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 12:04 PM Dana Walker <dawal...@redhat.com> wrote: > Given dalley's point regarding the bindings, option 3 sounds best. > > Dana Walker > > She / Her / Hers > > Software Engineer, Pulp Project > > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com> > > dawal...@redhat.com > <https://www.redhat.com> > > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:45 AM Daniel Alley <dal...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Going by the comments in this PR [0], if something like this would be >> used with the API bindings, wouldn't the name__ne=value scheme be better? >> It also just generally seems a bit more consistent. >> >> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/316/files >> >> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:51 AM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> If we went with django-rest-framework-filters, I'm not sure we could go >>> with other options later. Our REST API is semantically versioned so we >>> couldn't switch from name!=value to name__ne=value. Perhaps we could label >>> not equal filters as a tech preview to get around this? >>> >>> Also, I'm curious about how we'd upgrade to django 3.0. It looks like >>> they haven't been merging PRs so I imagine we'd have to fork the project, >>> add django 3.0 support ourselves, and then vendor it. Is my understanding >>> correct? >>> >>> David >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:13 AM Brian Bouterse <bmbou...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:03 AM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> A few weeks ago, Katello opened an issue[0] requesting a set of "not >>>>> equal" filters (ie filters where a field is not equal to a certain value). >>>>> I created a pulpcore issue[0] to investigate whether pulpcore could >>>>> provide >>>>> this functionality and it seems there are a few different options. I >>>>> wanted >>>>> to ask for feedback though as this would affect the user experience and >>>>> thus whatever option we choose would be permanent. >>>>> >>>>> There are three options: >>>>> >>>>> 1. First there is a package which adds functionality on top of >>>>> django-rest-framework-filters[1] which dynamically provides filters for >>>>> every field using ! (eg name!=value, state!=value). The problem is that >>>>> the >>>>> package doesn't look like it's well maintained[2] and we'd quickly run >>>>> into >>>>> problems when we try to upgrade to django 3 for example[3]. We'd probably >>>>> have to fork the project or take over ownership somehow. >>>>> >>>> I default to this choice because even though it's not code that is in >>>> our control and that can feel uncomfortable, they wrote it and it does what >>>> we need. If it doesn't work out we can go with other options later. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 2. The second solution is that we can try to import the code from >>>>> django-rest-framework-filters that creates these dynamic filters. This >>>>> would free us from having to support any other features >>>>> from django-rest-framework-filters we don't want to support. >>>>> >>>>> 3. The third option is to create a django scope (ie "ne") that would >>>>> allow plugin writers to manually define filters like "name__eq=value". >>>>> This >>>>> solution seems the most verbose/explicit/straightforward but also the most >>>>> work for plugin writers. I have a couple PRs open to demonstrate this >>>>> solution: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/pulp/pulp_rpm/pull/1559 >>>>> https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/452 >>>>> >>>>> I'll try to move forward with a solution next week. Feedback before >>>>> then would be much appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5854 >>>>> [1] https://github.com/philipn/django-rest-framework-filters >>>>> [2] >>>>> https://github.com/philipn/django-rest-framework-filters/issues/324 >>>>> and >>>>> https://github.com/philipn/django-rest-framework-filters/issues/287 >>>>> [3] >>>>> https://github.com/philipn/django-rest-framework-filters/issues/326 >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
