Opened 4 years ago
Closed 4 years ago
#32086 closed Cleanup/optimization (wontfix)
Misleading documentation on AccessMixin
| Reported by: | Remy | Owned by: | nobody |
|---|---|---|---|
| Component: | Documentation | Version: | 3.1 |
| Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | Triage Stage: | Unreviewed | |
| Has patch: | no | Needs documentation: | no |
| Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
| Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | no |
Description
In this section of the documentation: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.1/topics/auth/default/#redirecting-unauthorized-requests-in-class-based-views
We can read:
To ease the handling of access restrictions in class-based views, the AccessMixin can be used to configure the behavior of a view when access is denied. Authenticated users are denied access with an HTTP 403 Forbidden response. Anonymous users are redirected to the login page or shown an HTTP 403 Forbidden response, depending on the raise_exception attribute.
Which leads the reader to think that AccessMixin actually does something, e.g redirect anonymous users to the login page etc, when actually no, AccessMixin won't do any of that. It's just an abstract class that is overloaded by other mixins in order to achieve such behaviors.
I suggest we should clarify that. Maybe rewrite so that those are shown as example use cases, achievable after implementing some of the django mixins that subclass AccessMixin (e.g LoginRequiredMixin).
Note:
See TracTickets
for help on using tickets.
Hi Remy. I'm going to say wontfix here.
The combination of
Mixinandviewhere seems clear enough already to me:Nonetheless, you're welcome to submit a PR with a proposed adjustment. If that looks clearer on review we can always reopen and Accept.
I hope that seems fair.
Thanks.