Skip to content

Implement custom fields#7

Merged
Joel-Luca merged 27 commits intomasterfrom
jch/TI-2893
Oct 22, 2025
Merged

Implement custom fields#7
Joel-Luca merged 27 commits intomasterfrom
jch/TI-2893

Conversation

@Joel-Luca
Copy link
Member

@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca commented Sep 18, 2025

Description

  • Implement custom field models
  • Implement custom field model base manager for custom field annotations
  • Implement custom field base serializer for custom field serialization
  • Implement custom field viewset
  • Improve dummy app

Belongs to PBI TI-2893.

Checklist

The following checklist should help us to stick to our "definition of done":

  • Proposed changes include tests.
  • Good error handling with useful messages
  • Changelog added
  • Django migration files have a meaningful name (not 0000_auto_xyz.py nor 0000_alter_xy_model).
  • Strings are set and translation catalogs have been updated (i18n-scan or i18n-update) and translations made.
  • Readme has been updated if changes interfere with the setup process.

@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca force-pushed the jch/TI-2893 branch 5 times, most recently from 2ede689 to 0b52dd6 Compare September 25, 2025 16:40
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca force-pushed the jch/TI-2893 branch 3 times, most recently from 6015cd1 to 37cc828 Compare October 1, 2025 08:01
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca force-pushed the jch/TI-2893 branch 4 times, most recently from 4b185d1 to 63d8e93 Compare October 9, 2025 07:53
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca changed the base branch from master to jch/TI-2887 October 9, 2025 07:54
Base automatically changed from jch/TI-2887 to master October 9, 2025 12:47
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca force-pushed the jch/TI-2893 branch 2 times, most recently from 2ad8b98 to e1b5bd6 Compare October 14, 2025 06:35
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca requested a review from a team October 14, 2025 06:39
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca marked this pull request as ready for review October 14, 2025 06:39
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca force-pushed the jch/TI-2893 branch 4 times, most recently from 864ed92 to 7691bbb Compare October 14, 2025 13:50
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca force-pushed the jch/TI-2893 branch 2 times, most recently from 02db13f to 3341b1b Compare October 21, 2025 05:34
Copy link
Contributor

@xenoy xenoy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need to discus, the commants to see what needs to be changed and what could be done at a future point.

What i would generally discus is the implementation of choice values. I think they don't need to be handled that differently. The main difference to other values is they already exist and are the only valid options. If the identifier (value) of the custom value in combination with the field is made unique and you handle every value as if it would be a choice value. This way you don't need the hack to map the id as you can use value and field as identifier. This would also reduce the amount of entries as if two instance had the same value, regardless if it is a choice field, fhey would point to the same value.

@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca requested a review from xenoy October 22, 2025 13:06
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca merged commit 2992104 into master Oct 22, 2025
1 check passed
@Joel-Luca Joel-Luca deleted the jch/TI-2893 branch October 22, 2025 15:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants