#24851 closed Bug (fixed)
Regression in reverse one-to-one field in list_display
| Reported by: | Eduardo Rivas | Owned by: | Tim Graham |
|---|---|---|---|
| Component: | contrib.admin | Version: | 1.8 |
| Severity: | Release blocker | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | Triage Stage: | Accepted | |
| Has patch: | yes | Needs documentation: | no |
| Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
| Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description
Including reverse one-to-one relations in list_display or fields in a ModelAdmin breaks the "change_list" and "change" admin views.
The "change" view raises a FieldError saying the reverse one-to-one field is unknown. The "change_list" raises AttributeError: 'OneToOneRel' object has no attribute 'rel'.
I've setup a small test app here: https://gitlab.com/jerivas/one-to-one-bug.
To reproduce:
- Clone the repo
- Install deps from requirements.txt
- Start the development server
- Visit the admin. User/pass: proj/proj
- Both the Car and Engine admins should work
- Uncomment lines 7 & 8 from
cars/admin.py - Both the "change_list" and "change" views of the Car admin are now broken. The Engine admin continues to work as expected.
This worked normally in 1.6, and I just found it while updating a project from 1.6 to 1.8. I don't know if the bug was introduced in 1.7 or 1.8.
Attachments (1)
Change History (10)
comment:1 by , 10 years ago
| Component: | Uncategorized → contrib.admin |
|---|---|
| Severity: | Normal → Release blocker |
| Summary: | Reverse one-to-one relations break the admin. → Regression in reverse one-to-one field in list_display |
| Triage Stage: | Unreviewed → Accepted |
by , 10 years ago
| Attachment: | 24851-test.diff added |
|---|
comment:2 by , 10 years ago
Whoops, you're right, I was only using list_display in 1.6. Sorry about that.
However, wouldn't it be appropriate to support reverse one-to-one relations in fields? I see three possible scenarios:
- Reverse one-to-one relations fully supported in
fields. - Supported only when they appear in
readonly_fields. - Unsupported, but they raise a more useful exception and is explained in the docs. The current exception says the one-to-one field is unknown to the model, which is confusing and gives the impression the user has made a typo in
fields. IMOImproperlyConfiguredwould be better.
If you think any of the above have the potential of flying as a feature request, I can open a new ticket.
comment:3 by , 10 years ago
I don't think it could be easily supported in fields as that would require saving the related instance. readonly_fields support might be doable. I think a natural suggestion for the error message would be to suggest to use an inline.
comment:4 by , 10 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → assigned |
comment:8 by , 9 years ago
I'm having an extremely similar issue, but when the reverse OneToOne is in the readonly list, rather than fields. Is it possible it's the same issue? The above mentioned test app seems to be gone.
comment:9 by , 9 years ago
This has been fixed in Django 1.8.3+ so if you can reproduce your problem there, please open a new ticket with details. Thanks.
Reproduced the
list_displaycrash and bisected the regression in 1.8 at fb48eb05816b1ac87d58696cdfe48be18c901f16. It's fixed in master by 8f30556329b64005d63b66859a74752a0b261315 but we should fix it in 1.8 too. Attaching a regression test.As for the change view error, that seems to be reproducible on stable/1.6.x and stable/1.4.x so I don't think it's a regression or a bug.