Opened 15 years ago
Last modified 9 months ago
#12264 assigned New feature
calendar.js depends on jsi18n but date widgets using it do not specify as required media
Reported by: | Owned by: | Adam Zapletal | |
---|---|---|---|
Component: | Forms | Version: | 1.1 |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Adam Zapletal, Claude Paroz, Tom Carrick | Triage Stage: | Accepted |
Has patch: | no | Needs documentation: | no |
Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description
Its nice that we can just use the admin widgets in our own public forms - except trying to include the split date/time widget results in a need for gettext which is in the jsi18n package which requires a separate urlconf entry and view to pull into my app. This is messy. Dependent code should automatically pull in its dependencies.
Change History (8)
comment:1 by , 15 years ago
Triage Stage: | Unreviewed → Accepted |
---|
comment:2 by , 14 years ago
Severity: | → Normal |
---|---|
Type: | → Bug |
comment:3 by , 14 years ago
Easy pickings: | unset |
---|---|
Type: | Bug → New feature |
comment:5 by , 10 months ago
Cc: | added |
---|
It looks like this is still valid. Supporting this idea doesn't seem very straightforward given the dynamic nature of django/views/templates/i18n_catalog.js
. I agree with the comment above that it's ok if a user wanting to use admin-specific widgets that aren't designed to be used outside of the admin may have to do a bit of extra integration work.
If a user wants to use the widgets without internationalization, they should be able to define simple JavaScript stubs for gettext
, pgettext
, and get_format
to get things working. If they want to use internationalization, I feel like having to do the same kind of integration that the admin does is acceptable.
Considering the above, does this bit of the docs on form media seem misleading? https://github.com/django/django/blob/73df8b54a2fab53bec4c7573cda5ad8c869c2fd8/docs/topics/forms/media.txt#L21-L32
comment:6 by , 9 months ago
Cc: | added |
---|
Tom, Claude, would you have further insights for the comment:5 above?
comment:7 by , 9 months ago
I agree completely. In my mind, the admin widgets aren't really that suitable for use in user code. If people want to use them, fine, but I think it should be at their own risk and we shouldn't add any extra maintenance burden in supporting this.
With this piece of documentation, I feel like it's suggesting that any visible change we make to a widget could be backwards incompatible and I don't think we want that, at least I personally would like the freedom to change the admin widgets between releases to make improvements without worrying too much that they might affect someone's site otherwise.
I think we should discourage this by at a minimum removing this paragraph and closing this ticket.
Just my opinion, anyway :)
comment:8 by , 9 months ago
Owner: | changed from | to
---|---|
Status: | new → assigned |
Thanks for the activity here! I'm happy to open a pull request when a consensus is reached.
IMHO being able to reuse admin widgets in out own apps isn't parr of the design objectives of thes widgets. I think being able to achieve that should be possible but the developer needs to perform all the steps needed for the integration, just like with any other front end component. I particularly don't like at all having to devise a way to magically add a view like the one serving the jsi18n catalog to the URL map of the third party app.