id	summary	reporter	owner	description	type	status	component	version	severity	resolution	keywords	cc	stage	has_patch	needs_docs	needs_tests	needs_better_patch	easy	ui_ux
13176	Provide finer control over table name conventions	ejm	nobody	"This is a suggestion about database table names and the way they are generated or specified. I think it would be useful if there was finer control over this.

The current default behavior (<app_name>_<model_name>) is good, but it would be useful if we could, for example:
 * specify an optional root ""label"", so that tables are named <root_label>_<app_name>_<model_name>
 * specify a different label for the <app_name> part (e.g. a generic 'db_table_prefix' setting that is somehow set app-wide, and which defaults to the app name)
 * specify whether to pluralize the <model_name> (possibly using the model's 'verbose_name_plural' property, or a new property e.g. 'model_name_plural')

There are probably more properties that could be added to control different aspects of name generation. 

Also, if such mechanisms were provided, then possibly some of the django.contrib packages (e.g. sites, sessions, contenttypes) could use them to provide better names for their tables, rather than hard-coded 'django_sites', etc.

The reasons to be flexible and provide finer control over table naming conventions:
 * To allow Django to work alongside another platform, under a common naming scheme
 * To make the database schema more understandable to human viewers (i.e. code readability considerations, maintainability, future-proofing)
 * To keep the database conceptually separate from Django - to not have 'django_' prefixed tables or magical, ""internal-looking"" tables, like some other frameworks (Django is already pretty good about this and I think it fits with what I understand of the project philosophy)
"		closed	Database layer (models, ORM)	1.1		wontfix	database, tables		Unreviewed	0	0	0	0	0	0