starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Replace unique_together with UniqueConstraint #2581

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:20:07 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:20:07 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (May 3, 2019).

Proposed Changes

Replace all instances of unique_together under model Meta classes with an equivalent UniqueConstraint implementation.

Justification

Django 2.2 introduced constraints, and the unique_together Meta option will likely be deprecated in the near future.

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (May 3, 2019). ### Proposed Changes Replace all instances of `unique_together` under model Meta classes with an equivalent UniqueConstraint implementation. ### Justification Django 2.2 introduced [constraints](https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.2/ref/models/constraints/#uniqueconstraint), and the `unique_together` Meta option will likely be deprecated in the near future.
adam added the status: acceptedtype: housekeeping labels 2025-12-29 18:20:07 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:20:07 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:20:08 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 8, 2019):

@hellerve did some great work on this. Unfortunately, adopting UniqueConstraint requires manually specifying a (often verbose) name for each constraint, as opposed to the auto-generated name provided by unique_together. Given that this would be a net-zero change and that unique_together is not currently marked for deprecation, let's avoid this for now. (It's not that we can't define a name for each, it's just one more thing to worry about.)

Hopefully Django will implement automatic naming for UniqueConstraints in a future release.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 8, 2019): @hellerve did some great work on this. Unfortunately, adopting `UniqueConstraint` requires manually specifying a (often verbose) name for each constraint, as opposed to the auto-generated name provided by `unique_together`. Given that this would be a net-zero change and that `unique_together` is not currently marked for deprecation, let's avoid this for now. (It's not that we _can't_ define a name for each, it's just one more thing to worry about.) Hopefully Django will implement automatic naming for UniqueConstraints in a future release.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label status: accepted type: housekeeping
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#2581
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?