Merge pull request #791 from czarneckid/fix-reverse-delete-rule-documentation
Fix the documentation for reverse_delete_rule.
This commit is contained in:
		
							
								
								
									
										1
									
								
								AUTHORS
									
									
									
									
									
								
							
							
						
						
									
										1
									
								
								AUTHORS
									
									
									
									
									
								
							| @@ -210,3 +210,4 @@ that much better: | ||||
|  * Jay Shirley (https://github.com/jshirley) | ||||
|  * DavidBord (https://github.com/DavidBord) | ||||
|  * Axel Haustant (https://github.com/noirbizarre) | ||||
|  * David Czarnecki (https://github.com/czarneckid) | ||||
|   | ||||
| @@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ Changes in 0.9.X - DEV | ||||
| - Allow atomic update for the entire `DictField` #742 | ||||
| - Added MultiPointField, MultiLineField, MultiPolygonField | ||||
| - Fix multiple connections aliases being rewritten #748 | ||||
| - Fixed a few instances where reverse_delete_rule was written as reverse_delete_rules. #791 | ||||
|  | ||||
|  | ||||
| Changes in 0.8.7 | ||||
| ================ | ||||
|   | ||||
| @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ cleaner looking while still allowing manual execution of the callback:: | ||||
| ReferenceFields and Signals | ||||
| --------------------------- | ||||
|  | ||||
| Currently `reverse_delete_rules` do not trigger signals on the other part of | ||||
| Currently `reverse_delete_rule` does not trigger signals on the other part of | ||||
| the relationship.  If this is required you must manually handle the | ||||
| reverse deletion. | ||||
|  | ||||
|   | ||||
| @@ -859,7 +859,7 @@ class ReferenceField(BaseField): | ||||
|  | ||||
|     Use the `reverse_delete_rule` to handle what should happen if the document | ||||
|     the field is referencing is deleted.  EmbeddedDocuments, DictFields and | ||||
|     MapFields do not support reverse_delete_rules and an `InvalidDocumentError` | ||||
|     MapFields does not support reverse_delete_rule and an `InvalidDocumentError` | ||||
|     will be raised if trying to set on one of these Document / Field types. | ||||
|  | ||||
|     The options are: | ||||
| @@ -883,7 +883,7 @@ class ReferenceField(BaseField): | ||||
|         Bar.register_delete_rule(Foo, 'bar', NULLIFY) | ||||
|  | ||||
|     .. note :: | ||||
|         `reverse_delete_rules` do not trigger pre / post delete signals to be | ||||
|         `reverse_delete_rule` does not trigger pre / post delete signals to be | ||||
|         triggered. | ||||
|  | ||||
|     .. versionchanged:: 0.5 added `reverse_delete_rule` | ||||
|   | ||||
| @@ -1795,7 +1795,7 @@ class InstanceTest(unittest.TestCase): | ||||
|         self.assertEqual(Bar.objects.count(), 1)  # No effect on the BlogPost | ||||
|         self.assertEqual(Bar.objects.get().foo, None) | ||||
|  | ||||
|     def test_invalid_reverse_delete_rules_raise_errors(self): | ||||
|     def test_invalid_reverse_delete_rule_raise_errors(self): | ||||
|  | ||||
|         def throw_invalid_document_error(): | ||||
|             class Blog(Document): | ||||
|   | ||||
		Reference in New Issue
	
	Block a user