Well shoot...this definitely seems like something only I'm running into.
Appreciate y'alls feedback. Thanks
--
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
On 19-04-16 17:34:11, Will Gordon wrote:
>In the same way that editable fields are forced to not be included in a
>ModelForm (
>https://github.com/django/django/blob/master/django/forms/models.py#L146),
>I would like to propose that "required" fields (`blank=False`) be forced to
>be included in
Yes I agree with others, that this should not be implemented. As I find
this too much specific to just your case.
There are many cases, like what if there is some required field which the
developer wants to set by themselves and don't want user to edit that
(transaction details maybe for a
I'm against, there are lots of cases where a modelform is used to edit an
exitsting object and thus the required fields are already set and you don't
want them to be editable.
If it's a trivial patch then you should think about extending modelform in
your own project enforce it there and then
Please don't do this.
There are very good reasons for NOT including blank=False fields by default
such as batch-editing some field with a formset or inlineformset or just
offering different forms to users with different access levels (as Tobias
wrote).
Django started recommending using `fields`
Python has a warning system, and Django already uses it for things like
deprecation notices.
I don't like error by default as an approach to this, but a warning (which
is easy to ignore -- it doesn't break your code) would be fine.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Would it be weird to just make it so that the "required" field *must* be
present in exclude? This way, if you *accidentally* leave off a required
field, you're quickly notified about itbut if you explicitly mark it as
something to exclude, it makes it clear to everyone exactly what you're
I can certainly agree that there may be some use cases where it should be
possible to disable this functionality, but I would argue that erroring on
a missing, required field should be the default, and allow for a way to
override...as opposed to allowing missing fields and requiring a
There are plenty of use cases when this behavior wouldn't be desired, such
as editing the same model object with 2+ different model forms. Such a
pattern might be more common when editing an existing object, but isn't out
of the question for creating new objects, either (think of a multi-step
form
Sorry if I wasn't more clear, but using a warning was exactly what I was
proposing. In the same way that a FieldError is raised when an editable field
is listed in fields, I was essentially planning on doing the exact same
check on the blank attribute. I agree that this should be ignorable, and
As the documentation points out, ModelForm avoids implicitly adding fields
to a form when you haven't told it to, and does so for security reasons.
Mass-assignment bugs have caused significant security issues in the past
for other systems which *did* implicitly support/add fields, and I'd like
to
11 matches
Mail list logo
