Hi Jim,
On 05/10/2011 02:09 PM, Jim D. wrote:
> I'm looking at a five-year-old ticket here (http://
> code.djangoproject.com/ticket/1342) that suggests MAX_SHOW_ALL_ALLOWED
> in the admin be configurable. As of now it is hard coded at 200 in
> contrib/admin/views/main.py .
> The ticket is, in my opinion, somewhat erroneously marked as "fixed",
> as someone pointed out 14 months ago. The patch that supposedly fixed
> it is the one that added the list_per_page attribute; however, that
> patch only addressed half of the issue (ability to configure results
> per page) and not the other half related to the show all.
> Clearly this is not an issue of overwhelming importance or I'd imagine
> it would have already come up in the last five years. Be that as it
> may, I have an important use case where I'd like to preserve
> pagination but allow for a show_all link to appear, which can only be
> accomplished gracefully by changing the MAX_SHOW_ALL_ALLOWED. It also
> strikes me as bad form to hard code an arbitrary value like that
> without providing any recourse to amend it.
Agreed.
> First question is administrative -- should I reopen this old ticket or
> start a new ticket?
I think I'd open a new one, in this case, with reference to the existing
one.
> Second question is how to approach the patch. Is it acceptable to move
> this to global_settings under an "Admin" section at the bottom and
> leave it undocumented? Given that it's already undocumented and there
> are other settings in global_settings that are also undocumented, this
> would seem to be the quickest approach that would hopefully ruffle the
> fewest feathers. If that's not kosher, I'd be happy to contribute a
> patch with full documentation if need be, or to take a different
> approach, e.g. make this configurable at the site or model admin
> level.
I think having it configurable at (ideally) both the admin-site and
model-admin level (and having that documented) would be much better than
a new setting.
> Third question, is there some reason this issue has not been fixed
> before or should not be fixed? Mostly I just want to make sure this
> issue has not been discussed before and some conclusion reached that
> I'm not aware of (searched, but couldn't find anything).
You've searched the mailing list and the ticket tracker - that's due
diligence. I haven't been around as long as some, but I don't know of
any discussions about this. I think it's just been low priority and
overlooked.
> If anyone has any thoughts regarding any of these questions I'd
> appreciate hearing them. My main objective is to find the most direct
> path to something that you guys will find acceptable. Thanks.
Thanks for contributing!
Carl
