On Mar 2, 2013, at 3:49 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > I'm with Aymeric: the current behavior is bad enough, and this is a > big enough improvement, and the backwards-incompatibility is minor > enough.
Right now, the only real example I've heard (there might be more is): 1. The ORM generates multiple updating operations for a single API-level operation. 2. The developer did nothing to manage their transaction model (no decorator, no middleware), but, 3. Is relying on Django to provide a transaction in this case. That situation does exist, but it does seem pretty edge-case-y. Does it exist in any case besides model inheritance? If not, could we have the ORM wrap those operations in a transaction in that particular case? -- -- Christophe Pettus [email protected] -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
