Re: Improved labels for M2M relations
Hey there, thanks! I agree, "Relation between and " will work in all cases. Here’s a draft implementation: https://github.com/django/django/compare/master...julianklotz:feature_better_m2m_relation_labels Here’s what needs to be improved: - `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model`: The method uses both model classes and model class names; to access the verbose name, class names need to be resolved to “real” classes first. Any hints how to do that? `resolve_relation` doesn't to the job, because it returns both model names and classes, too. - Not sure how to implement tests for __str__ method without creating migrations? Let me know what you think about it. Julian Adam Johnson schrieb am Montag, 2. November 2020 um 10:21:06 UTC+1: > I don't think we can use just "Relation to" because M2M relationships are > two-way by default. Whilst a ManyToManyField can be declared on one model, > it adds a reverse field on the other model. We'd have to show both sides of > the relation e.g. "Relation between and ". > > On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 08:56, Julian Klotz wrote: > >> … one last thought: >> >> The verbose name could be: “Media Item-Piece relation” >> The string presentation could be: “Relation to > to-instance>”, e.g. “Relation to Piece xyz” >> >> Together: >> *Media Item-Piece relation: Relation to Piece xyz (ID: 11773)* >> >> >> Julian Klotz schrieb am Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2020 um 09:30:59 UTC+1: >> >>> Hi Adam, >>> >>> thanks for picking this up so quickly. >>> I considered setting custom “through” models to set verbose name and >>> __str__, but I currently can’t “afford” changing all m2m fields throught >>> the application. >>> >>> Here’s the feedback I got concerning the usability issues (e.g. for >>> MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773)) >>> >>>- Some people thought “11773” was the number of objects to be >>>deleted, even though the UI clearly states something else – it isn’t >>>obvious for some people that relations have their own IDs >>>- People asked where they could change the (then-deleted) relation >>>to a different object >>> >>> >>> >>> *It can also help with debugging as the label appears in the default >>> str/repr.* >>> Thanks for giving me that hint. It’s the __str__ method of models.Model. >>> Changing the default string presentation may be dangerous and also too >>> generic. It would make sense to define a custom to-string method in >>> `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` (fields/related.py)*.* >>> Instead of showing *MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773),* >>> something like “Media Item-Piece relation, ID: 11773) would be good*; >>> *moreover, >>> it may be a good idea to show the “from” model’s edit link to point people >>> to the place where they can change this relation. >>> >>> *My main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?* >>> Good point. I just checked – interestingly, neither changing the verbose >>> name nor the __str__ method triggers new migrations 拾 >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards >>> Julian >>> >>> Adam Johnson schrieb am Montag, 26. Oktober 2020 um 19:56:15 UTC+1: >>> Hi Julian It should be noted that you can improve the display today by creating explicit through models. However this is more longwinded. This change does look like a neat usability improvement to me. It can also help with debugging as the label appears in the default str/repr. My main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects? Thanks, Adam On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 16:28, Julian Klotz wrote: > > Hey there, > > here’s a little topic that impacts the usability of Django admin’s > delete views. > > When deleting an object using django admin, you get a nice summary of > all deleted objects. > I really like the overview, but the labels used to describe m2m > relations that will be deleted aren't user-friendly at all: > > […] > >- MediaItem-subseries-relation: MediaItem_sub_series_relation >object (11482) >- MediaItem-piece-relation: MediaItem_pieces_relation object >(11773) > > So I’d like to improve the labels a bit, using the from and to model’s > verbose names. This can be easily accomplished by changing > `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` in fields/related.py. > > To be honest, I don’t know how to update the tests for something > rooted deeply in Django’s core.Is anyone who is more competent than me > interested in fixing this? It would greatly improve the “delete > confirmation“ views. > > Here’s what I’ve got so for; it only fixes the model’s verbose name, > not its string presentation. > > Best regards > Julian > > > […] > to = make_model_tuple(to_model)[1] > from_ = klass._meta.model_name > > if
Re: Improved labels for M2M relations
I don't think we can use just "Relation to" because M2M relationships are
two-way by default. Whilst a ManyToManyField can be declared on one model,
it adds a reverse field on the other model. We'd have to show both sides of
the relation e.g. "Relation between and ".
On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 at 08:56, Julian Klotz wrote:
> … one last thought:
>
> The verbose name could be: “Media Item-Piece relation”
> The string presentation could be: “Relation to to-instance>”, e.g. “Relation to Piece xyz”
>
> Together:
> *Media Item-Piece relation: Relation to Piece xyz (ID: 11773)*
>
>
> Julian Klotz schrieb am Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2020 um 09:30:59 UTC+1:
>
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> thanks for picking this up so quickly.
>> I considered setting custom “through” models to set verbose name and
>> __str__, but I currently can’t “afford” changing all m2m fields throught
>> the application.
>>
>> Here’s the feedback I got concerning the usability issues (e.g. for
>> MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773))
>>
>>- Some people thought “11773” was the number of objects to be
>>deleted, even though the UI clearly states something else – it isn’t
>>obvious for some people that relations have their own IDs
>>- People asked where they could change the (then-deleted) relation to
>>a different object
>>
>>
>>
>> *It can also help with debugging as the label appears in the default
>> str/repr.*
>> Thanks for giving me that hint. It’s the __str__ method of models.Model.
>> Changing the default string presentation may be dangerous and also too
>> generic. It would make sense to define a custom to-string method in
>> `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` (fields/related.py)*.*
>> Instead of showing *MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773),* something
>> like “Media Item-Piece relation, ID: 11773) would be good*; *moreover,
>> it may be a good idea to show the “from” model’s edit link to point people
>> to the place where they can change this relation.
>>
>> *My main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?*
>> Good point. I just checked – interestingly, neither changing the verbose
>> name nor the __str__ method triggers new migrations 拾
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards
>> Julian
>>
>> Adam Johnson schrieb am Montag, 26. Oktober 2020 um 19:56:15 UTC+1:
>>
>>> Hi Julian
>>>
>>> It should be noted that you can improve the display today by creating
>>> explicit through models. However this is more longwinded.
>>>
>>> This change does look like a neat usability improvement to me. It can
>>> also help with debugging as the label appears in the default str/repr. My
>>> main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 16:28, Julian Klotz
>>> wrote:
>>>
Hey there,
here’s a little topic that impacts the usability of Django admin’s
delete views.
When deleting an object using django admin, you get a nice summary of
all deleted objects.
I really like the overview, but the labels used to describe m2m
relations that will be deleted aren't user-friendly at all:
[…]
- MediaItem-subseries-relation: MediaItem_sub_series_relation
object (11482)
- MediaItem-piece-relation: MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773)
So I’d like to improve the labels a bit, using the from and to model’s
verbose names. This can be easily accomplished by changing
`create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` in fields/related.py.
To be honest, I don’t know how to update the tests for something rooted
deeply in Django’s core.Is anyone who is more competent than me interested
in fixing this? It would greatly improve the “delete confirmation“ views.
Here’s what I’ve got so for; it only fixes the model’s verbose name,
not its string presentation.
Best regards
Julian
[…]
to = make_model_tuple(to_model)[1]
from_ = klass._meta.model_name
if isinstance(to_model, str):
to_label = to
to_label_plural = to
else:
to_label = to_model._meta.verbose_name
to_label_plural = to_model._meta.verbose_name_plural
from_label = klass._meta.verbose_name
from_label_plural = klass._meta.verbose_name_plural
if to == from_:
to = 'to_%s' % to
from_ = 'from_%s' % from_
meta = type('Meta', (), {
'db_table': field._get_m2m_db_table(klass._meta),
'auto_created': klass,
'app_label': klass._meta.app_label,
'db_tablespace': klass._meta.db_tablespace,
'unique_together': (from_, to),
'verbose_name': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationship') % {'from':
from_label, 'to': to_label},
'verbose_name_plural': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationships') %
{'from': from_label_plural, 'to':
Re: Improved labels for M2M relations
… one last thought:
The verbose name could be: “Media Item-Piece relation”
The string presentation could be: “Relation to ”, e.g. “Relation to Piece xyz”
Together:
*Media Item-Piece relation: Relation to Piece xyz (ID: 11773)*
Julian Klotz schrieb am Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2020 um 09:30:59 UTC+1:
> Hi Adam,
>
> thanks for picking this up so quickly.
> I considered setting custom “through” models to set verbose name and
> __str__, but I currently can’t “afford” changing all m2m fields throught
> the application.
>
> Here’s the feedback I got concerning the usability issues (e.g. for
> MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773))
>
>- Some people thought “11773” was the number of objects to be deleted,
>even though the UI clearly states something else – it isn’t obvious for
>some people that relations have their own IDs
>- People asked where they could change the (then-deleted) relation to
>a different object
>
>
>
> *It can also help with debugging as the label appears in the default
> str/repr.*
> Thanks for giving me that hint. It’s the __str__ method of models.Model.
> Changing the default string presentation may be dangerous and also too
> generic. It would make sense to define a custom to-string method in
> `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` (fields/related.py)*.*
> Instead of showing *MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773),* something
> like “Media Item-Piece relation, ID: 11773) would be good*; *moreover, it
> may be a good idea to show the “from” model’s edit link to point people to
> the place where they can change this relation.
>
> *My main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?*
> Good point. I just checked – interestingly, neither changing the verbose
> name nor the __str__ method triggers new migrations 拾
>
>
>
> Best regards
> Julian
>
> Adam Johnson schrieb am Montag, 26. Oktober 2020 um 19:56:15 UTC+1:
>
>> Hi Julian
>>
>> It should be noted that you can improve the display today by creating
>> explicit through models. However this is more longwinded.
>>
>> This change does look like a neat usability improvement to me. It can
>> also help with debugging as the label appears in the default str/repr. My
>> main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 16:28, Julian Klotz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hey there,
>>>
>>> here’s a little topic that impacts the usability of Django admin’s
>>> delete views.
>>>
>>> When deleting an object using django admin, you get a nice summary of
>>> all deleted objects.
>>> I really like the overview, but the labels used to describe m2m
>>> relations that will be deleted aren't user-friendly at all:
>>>
>>> […]
>>>
>>>- MediaItem-subseries-relation: MediaItem_sub_series_relation object
>>>(11482)
>>>- MediaItem-piece-relation: MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773)
>>>
>>> So I’d like to improve the labels a bit, using the from and to model’s
>>> verbose names. This can be easily accomplished by changing
>>> `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` in fields/related.py.
>>>
>>> To be honest, I don’t know how to update the tests for something rooted
>>> deeply in Django’s core.Is anyone who is more competent than me interested
>>> in fixing this? It would greatly improve the “delete confirmation“ views.
>>>
>>> Here’s what I’ve got so for; it only fixes the model’s verbose name, not
>>> its string presentation.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Julian
>>>
>>>
>>> […]
>>> to = make_model_tuple(to_model)[1]
>>> from_ = klass._meta.model_name
>>>
>>> if isinstance(to_model, str):
>>> to_label = to
>>> to_label_plural = to
>>> else:
>>> to_label = to_model._meta.verbose_name
>>> to_label_plural = to_model._meta.verbose_name_plural
>>>
>>> from_label = klass._meta.verbose_name
>>> from_label_plural = klass._meta.verbose_name_plural
>>>
>>> if to == from_:
>>> to = 'to_%s' % to
>>> from_ = 'from_%s' % from_
>>>
>>> meta = type('Meta', (), {
>>> 'db_table': field._get_m2m_db_table(klass._meta),
>>> 'auto_created': klass,
>>> 'app_label': klass._meta.app_label,
>>> 'db_tablespace': klass._meta.db_tablespace,
>>> 'unique_together': (from_, to),
>>> 'verbose_name': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationship') % {'from':
>>> from_label, 'to': to_label},
>>> 'verbose_name_plural': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationships') %
>>> {'from': from_label_plural, 'to': to_label_plural},
>>> 'apps': field.model._meta.apps,
>>> })
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>
Re: Improved labels for M2M relations
Hi Adam,
thanks for picking this up so quickly.
I considered setting custom “through” models to set verbose name and
__str__, but I currently can’t “afford” changing all m2m fields throught
the application.
Here’s the feedback I got concerning the usability issues (e.g. for
MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773))
- Some people thought “11773” was the number of objects to be deleted,
even though the UI clearly states something else – it isn’t obvious for
some people that relations have their own IDs
- People asked where they could change the (then-deleted) relation to a
different object
*It can also help with debugging as the label appears in the default
str/repr.*
Thanks for giving me that hint. It’s the __str__ method of models.Model.
Changing the default string presentation may be dangerous and also too
generic. It would make sense to define a custom to-string method in
`create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` (fields/related.py)*.*
Instead of showing *MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773),* something
like “Media Item-Piece relation, ID: 11773) would be good*; *moreover, it
may be a good idea to show the “from” model’s edit link to point people to
the place where they can change this relation.
*My main question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?*
Good point. I just checked – interestingly, neither changing the verbose
name nor the __str__ method triggers new migrations 拾
Best regards
Julian
Adam Johnson schrieb am Montag, 26. Oktober 2020 um 19:56:15 UTC+1:
> Hi Julian
>
> It should be noted that you can improve the display today by creating
> explicit through models. However this is more longwinded.
>
> This change does look like a neat usability improvement to me. It can also
> help with debugging as the label appears in the default str/repr. My main
> question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adam
>
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 16:28, Julian Klotz wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey there,
>>
>> here’s a little topic that impacts the usability of Django admin’s delete
>> views.
>>
>> When deleting an object using django admin, you get a nice summary of all
>> deleted objects.
>> I really like the overview, but the labels used to describe m2m relations
>> that will be deleted aren't user-friendly at all:
>>
>> […]
>>
>>- MediaItem-subseries-relation: MediaItem_sub_series_relation object
>>(11482)
>>- MediaItem-piece-relation: MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773)
>>
>> So I’d like to improve the labels a bit, using the from and to model’s
>> verbose names. This can be easily accomplished by changing
>> `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` in fields/related.py.
>>
>> To be honest, I don’t know how to update the tests for something rooted
>> deeply in Django’s core.Is anyone who is more competent than me interested
>> in fixing this? It would greatly improve the “delete confirmation“ views.
>>
>> Here’s what I’ve got so for; it only fixes the model’s verbose name, not
>> its string presentation.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Julian
>>
>>
>> […]
>> to = make_model_tuple(to_model)[1]
>> from_ = klass._meta.model_name
>>
>> if isinstance(to_model, str):
>> to_label = to
>> to_label_plural = to
>> else:
>> to_label = to_model._meta.verbose_name
>> to_label_plural = to_model._meta.verbose_name_plural
>>
>> from_label = klass._meta.verbose_name
>> from_label_plural = klass._meta.verbose_name_plural
>>
>> if to == from_:
>> to = 'to_%s' % to
>> from_ = 'from_%s' % from_
>>
>> meta = type('Meta', (), {
>> 'db_table': field._get_m2m_db_table(klass._meta),
>> 'auto_created': klass,
>> 'app_label': klass._meta.app_label,
>> 'db_tablespace': klass._meta.db_tablespace,
>> 'unique_together': (from_, to),
>> 'verbose_name': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationship') % {'from':
>> from_label, 'to': to_label},
>> 'verbose_name_plural': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationships') %
>> {'from': from_label_plural, 'to': to_label_plural},
>> 'apps': field.model._meta.apps,
>> })
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/69b6f2e0-8f0e-4cd0-b608-46fb9040b355n%40googlegroups.com
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
>
> --
> Adam
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
Re: Improved labels for M2M relations
Hi Julian
It should be noted that you can improve the display today by creating
explicit through models. However this is more longwinded.
This change does look like a neat usability improvement to me. It can also
help with debugging as the label appears in the default str/repr. My main
question is, does this not trigger migrations on user projects?
Thanks,
Adam
On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 16:28, Julian Klotz wrote:
>
> Hey there,
>
> here’s a little topic that impacts the usability of Django admin’s delete
> views.
>
> When deleting an object using django admin, you get a nice summary of all
> deleted objects.
> I really like the overview, but the labels used to describe m2m relations
> that will be deleted aren't user-friendly at all:
>
> […]
>
>- MediaItem-subseries-relation: MediaItem_sub_series_relation object
>(11482)
>- MediaItem-piece-relation: MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773)
>
> So I’d like to improve the labels a bit, using the from and to model’s
> verbose names. This can be easily accomplished by changing
> `create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` in fields/related.py.
>
> To be honest, I don’t know how to update the tests for something rooted
> deeply in Django’s core.Is anyone who is more competent than me interested
> in fixing this? It would greatly improve the “delete confirmation“ views.
>
> Here’s what I’ve got so for; it only fixes the model’s verbose name, not
> its string presentation.
>
> Best regards
> Julian
>
>
> […]
> to = make_model_tuple(to_model)[1]
> from_ = klass._meta.model_name
>
> if isinstance(to_model, str):
> to_label = to
> to_label_plural = to
> else:
> to_label = to_model._meta.verbose_name
> to_label_plural = to_model._meta.verbose_name_plural
>
> from_label = klass._meta.verbose_name
> from_label_plural = klass._meta.verbose_name_plural
>
> if to == from_:
> to = 'to_%s' % to
> from_ = 'from_%s' % from_
>
> meta = type('Meta', (), {
> 'db_table': field._get_m2m_db_table(klass._meta),
> 'auto_created': klass,
> 'app_label': klass._meta.app_label,
> 'db_tablespace': klass._meta.db_tablespace,
> 'unique_together': (from_, to),
> 'verbose_name': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationship') % {'from':
> from_label, 'to': to_label},
> 'verbose_name_plural': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationships') %
> {'from': from_label_plural, 'to': to_label_plural},
> 'apps': field.model._meta.apps,
> })
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/69b6f2e0-8f0e-4cd0-b608-46fb9040b355n%40googlegroups.com
>
> .
>
--
Adam
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMyDDM1cTKFXObortmGS3uevSA_6h4s%3Dyb4Yk8R1atooOMffpA%40mail.gmail.com.
Improved labels for M2M relations
Hey there,
here’s a little topic that impacts the usability of Django admin’s delete
views.
When deleting an object using django admin, you get a nice summary of all
deleted objects.
I really like the overview, but the labels used to describe m2m relations
that will be deleted aren't user-friendly at all:
[…]
- MediaItem-subseries-relation: MediaItem_sub_series_relation object
(11482)
- MediaItem-piece-relation: MediaItem_pieces_relation object (11773)
So I’d like to improve the labels a bit, using the from and to model’s
verbose names. This can be easily accomplished by changing
`create_many_to_many_intermediary_model` in fields/related.py.
To be honest, I don’t know how to update the tests for something rooted
deeply in Django’s core.Is anyone who is more competent than me interested
in fixing this? It would greatly improve the “delete confirmation“ views.
Here’s what I’ve got so for; it only fixes the model’s verbose name, not
its string presentation.
Best regards
Julian
[…]
to = make_model_tuple(to_model)[1]
from_ = klass._meta.model_name
if isinstance(to_model, str):
to_label = to
to_label_plural = to
else:
to_label = to_model._meta.verbose_name
to_label_plural = to_model._meta.verbose_name_plural
from_label = klass._meta.verbose_name
from_label_plural = klass._meta.verbose_name_plural
if to == from_:
to = 'to_%s' % to
from_ = 'from_%s' % from_
meta = type('Meta', (), {
'db_table': field._get_m2m_db_table(klass._meta),
'auto_created': klass,
'app_label': klass._meta.app_label,
'db_tablespace': klass._meta.db_tablespace,
'unique_together': (from_, to),
'verbose_name': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationship') % {'from':
from_label, 'to': to_label},
'verbose_name_plural': _('%(from)s-%(to)s relationships') %
{'from': from_label_plural, 'to': to_label_plural},
'apps': field.model._meta.apps,
})
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/69b6f2e0-8f0e-4cd0-b608-46fb9040b355n%40googlegroups.com.
