Hello David,
The proposed patch and test adjustments make sense to me, please open an
associated ticket and PR.
Thanks for digging this through and working on a solution!
I think that an argument could be made for the `if e.code == "unique" and
len(constraint.fields) == 1` branch in
Then what I do..?
On Mon, 12 Sep, 2022, 8:36 pm David Sanders,
wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> > This should already work for constraints over a single field but not on
> the ones with multiple fields[0] which is covered by the suite[1] but it
> doesn't look like UniqueConstraint.validate is providing
Hi Simon,
> This should already work for constraints over a single field but not on
the ones with multiple fields[0] which is covered by the suite[1] but it
doesn't look like UniqueConstraint.validate is providing code="unique"
which might be the source of the issue you are encountering?
Yep
Hello David
> Would it be possible to group the message by field in the same way as
standard unique?
This should already work for constraints over a single field but not on the
ones with multiple fields[0] which is covered by the suite[1] but it
doesn't look like UniqueConstraint.validate is
Hi Simon,
Cheers for the explanation.
I'm ok with the error message being the "constraint is violated" generic
message as I agree with what you're saying.
Would it be possible to group the message by field in the same way as
standard unique?
ie, would this be an idea?:
Hello David,
This is expected because Django doesn't have a way to express the
constraint in words to present to the user when a condition, which could be
complex, is provided.
When no conditions are defined the metadata is easy to interpret to form a
sentence out of ("Foo with this field0,
nice one there
On Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 3:36 PM David Sanders
wrote:
> Hi folks (and in particular Simon Charette),
>
> I had a bit of a gotcha moment when a custom unique constraint validation
> message disappeared when I added a condition to it. I won't raise a ticket
> for this because it
