Thanks for your answer.
I fully understand your point: I'm late in the release process.
In the other hand, can't we consider this as a "bug" for the fact that
this new feature is not consistent with what we can call a "de facto API"?
What I mean is that "request" and "obj" are passed and used almost by:
I know that this is not a documented part of Django. But internal
consistency is, IMHO, one of the pillars of a maintenable framework.
As you've also pointed your-self, adding the "obj" parameter after the
release of "get_inline_instances" will introduce a backward incompatible
change. (For those who will have overwritten the method and so do not
accept the "obj" parameter.)
As an illustration, the "obj" parameter could be used to cleanly
distinguish an add process from a change process (and choose which
inlines to display).
Just to be clear: I'm not saying at all that this could be considered as
a "release blocker". But adding this parameter now will certainly be
much less painful than doing it after the release.
In one hand, we have a release process that do not accept exceptions, in
the other hand we have a quite simple change to do that will be more
painful to do later: I think that it calls a pragmatic judgment.
I've made a ticket with a patch, as you've suggested . And I'll let
you be this pragmatic judge! :)
Will all my respect,
On 03/08/2012 05:35 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: