Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove dependency on contrib.sites #15

Open
collinanderson opened this issue Oct 10, 2014 · 6 comments
Open

Remove dependency on contrib.sites #15

collinanderson opened this issue Oct 10, 2014 · 6 comments

Comments

@collinanderson
Copy link
Contributor

I would use this and help support it if it didn't have the not-null models.ForeignKey('sites.Site').

Similar to https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/21381

@claudep
Copy link
Member

claudep commented Nov 11, 2015

After Django 1.9 is out, the plan is to publish the last release with Django 1.6 support, then we can start leveraging the migrations framework and work on this issue.

@claudep
Copy link
Member

claudep commented Dec 10, 2015

1.6.2 has been released today. We can now drop Django 1.6 and start counting on the migration system to go forward.

@ashwoods
Copy link

ashwoods commented Jul 7, 2016

Do you want to completely drop dependency on SITE, or make it optional?

@hedleyroos
Copy link
Contributor

Dropping sites support means you can't use the app in a multisite system. I would just softcode it to check whether django.contrib.sites is installed and adjust the queries accordingly.

@tisdall
Copy link

tisdall commented Mar 29, 2017

This shouldn't be too hard to do. For example, calls to sites.shortcuts.get_current_site(request) work regardless of 'sites' being installed. The '0001' migration needs to be changed to not be dependent on 'sites', use of settings.SITE_ID needs changing, and the change to the aforementioned ForeignKey.

Are the devs open to a PR related to this?

@claudep
Copy link
Member

claudep commented Mar 29, 2017

If you think your proposal will be able to cope with backwards compatibility, then sure!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants