Reimplement nested routes v3 #236
Conversation
This change requires that parent viewset defines lookup_url_kwarg or lookup_field. In exchange we do not need to define anything about url kwargs at register time. Old way is still supported, though pending deprecation. Also there is NestedHyperlinkedRelatedField and NestedHyperlinkedIdentityField which will use our config from viewsets to make writing serializers simpler and less error prone. You can also use register using with-statement.
|
Is there something preventing this from being merged? |
|
lots of merge conflicts |
|
|
@rpkilby can you share some insight about the approach of this PR? I would like to move this forward. Since you are a DRF core member. Your inputs are highly appreciated! |
|
Hi @auvipy. I'm not that familiar with drf-extensions. I made a change to DRF that broke the nested router, so I submitted #214, but that mostly consisted of removing old and unused code. I don't really have any insights here. That said, my general advice would be to break this up into multiple smaller PRs if possible. The original PR (#153) is pretty broad in scope and definitely in a first draft state (per the author's comments). If you can breakup the PR into smaller chunks, testing should be more manageable. You might try separating the router syntax changes from the viewset/serializer |
No description provided.