Re: [Django] #8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative

[Django]

#8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative
------------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: simon | Owner: simon
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Core (Other) | Version: SVN
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
------------------------------+------------------------------------
Changes (by aaugustin):

* ui_ux: => 0
* easy: => 0
* stage: Design decision needed => Accepted

Comment:

I'm accepting this ticket because `get_absolute_url` could certainly be
improved. If someone wants to work on this, please send a proposal to
django-developers.

--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8264#comment:9>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

[Django]

#8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative
------------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: simon | Owner: simon
Type: New feature | Status: new

Component: Core (Other) | Version: master

Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
------------------------------+------------------------------------

Changes (by danols):

* cc: ognajd@… (added)

--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8264#comment:10>

[Django]

#8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: simon | Owner: simon
Type: New feature | Status: new

Component: Core (URLs) | Version: master

Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0

-----------------------------+------------------------------------
Changes (by aaugustin):

* component: Core (Other) => Core (URLs)

--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8264#comment:11>

[Django]

#8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: simon | Owner: simon
Type: New feature | Status: new

Component: Core (URLs) | Version: dev

Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-----------------------------+------------------------------------

Comment (by Frederich Pedersen):

Is this still a feature that is considered open?

I see the problematic cases for the `get_absolute_url`, and why it should
be changed to `get_url` and `get_url_path`.
I suggest implementing them both, and writing a deprecation warning on the
`get_absolute_url` function.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8264#comment:12>

[Django]

#8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: simon | Owner: simon
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Core (URLs) | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-----------------------------+------------------------------------

Changes (by Frederich Pedersen):

* cc: Frederich Pedersen (added)

--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8264#comment:13>

[Django]

#8264: Replace get_absolute_url with more sane alternative
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: simon | Owner: simon
Type: New feature | Status: new
Component: Core (URLs) | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage: Accepted
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-----------------------------+------------------------------------

Changes (by Carlton Gibson):

* cc: Carlton Gibson (added)

Comment:

I hate to take an 18 year old ticket and say let's WONTFIX it, but I think
we should WONTFIX this.

There are two bits in the proposal. One is the name, `get_absolute_url()`.
I think changing it at this point is not worth the price of admission. OK,
it's not strictly a full URL because it's missing scheme and domain, but
it serves for one for internal purposes, and it is absolute for the site
(starting with `/`), rather than relative. (Would we say it's a "path-
absolute relative URL"? — That's a mouthful.) Anyhow I think we should
just live with it after all these years.

The second part is that ''missing scheme and domain''.

The standard way to handle this in the request-response cycle is with
[https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/6.0/ref/request-
response/#django.http.HttpRequest.build_absolute_uri
HttpRequest.build_absolute_uri], like so:

{{{
def my_view(request):
bookmark = Bookmarks.objects.get(id=1)
path = bookmark.get_absolute_url() # /bookmarks/1/
full_url = request.build_absolute_uri(path)
...
}}}

Outside the request-response cycle, Django cannot know the current
scheme/domain unless we provide it.

We **might** use the sites framework:

{{{
from django.contrib.sites.models import Site

site = Site.objects.get_current()
full_url = f"https://{site.domain}/bookmarks/1/"
}}}

Denpending on the sites framework being installed and `settings.SITE_ID`
being configured.

I think more and more people are **not** using the sites framework. (Us
leaning into it now would likely be us going against the current.)

In reality I think most folks are declaring a setting like:

{{{
# settings.py
SITE_URL = "https://example.com"
}}}

And then building a full URLs like:

{{{
from django.conf import settings

path = "/bookmarks/1/"
full_url = f"{settings.SITE_URL}{path}"
}}}

Such a setting is easily configured per-environment. It's pretty simple.

Users tend to know, in context, whether they need a full URL with scheme
and domain or whether the ''path-absolute relative URL'' is sufficient.
That this has sat here so long unfixed strongly implies to me that
anything more complex, to automatically handle that difference, really
isn't needed.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8264#comment:14>