Thanks that makes more sense than the current implementation. I hope that using ForeignKey for the current relationships now will allow me to update the with unique=True later ( of course realizing that I'll have to play with how I access the ForeignKey).
Vance On Feb 5, 2008 6:10 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 17:51 -0800, Vance Dubberly wrote: > > The Documentation has said for as long as I can remember (a year+) > > that the semantics of a the OneToOne relationship is going to change > > soon. Any clue as to when this is going to change > > Soon. > > > and/or what it's > > going to look like? > > It will look behave like ForeignKey(unique=True), except that a reverse > lookup will return the object on the reverse of the relation, not a list > containing one object (reverse lookups on ForeignKeys always return a > list, since it's one-to-many and we shouldn't change the return type > just because of the unique flag there). > > Also, the restriction that OneToOneFields are implicitly primary keys > will be removed, since there are cases where multiple one-to-one > relations in a model are required. > > Malcolm > > -- > I don't have a solution, but I admire your problem. > http://www.pointy-stick.com/blog/ > > > > > -- To pretend, I actually do the thing: I have therefore only pretended to pretend. - Jacques Derrida --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
