Skip to content

Conversation

carlosmart626
Copy link

Django permissions integration

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 5, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-4.6%) to 89.103% when pulling f32a4a3 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 6, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-4.6%) to 89.103% when pulling e66c1fa on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

2 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-4.6%) to 89.103% when pulling e66c1fa on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-4.6%) to 89.103% when pulling e66c1fa on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 6, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-4.6%) to 89.103% when pulling 061d9eb on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 6, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-1.7%) to 92.054% when pulling 6f138c8 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 7, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-5.2%) to 88.546% when pulling 4086525 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 7, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-5.2%) to 88.546% when pulling 3c0cbf0 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

3 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-5.2%) to 88.546% when pulling 3c0cbf0 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-5.2%) to 88.546% when pulling 3c0cbf0 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-5.2%) to 88.546% when pulling 3c0cbf0 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 8, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-2.3%) to 91.419% when pulling 2d525d7 on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@carlosmart626
Copy link
Author

Hi @syrusakbary, Django Filter 1.0.1 does not support Django 1.6 and Django 1.7 so update travis? or set Django Filter dependency to 0.11.0?

I've done some changes to use Django permissions and I would like to have some feedback 👍

@carlosmart626
Copy link
Author

Hi!, any feedback?

@BossGrand
Copy link
Member

You should get this to pass the ci tests, I think you'll be more likely to get feedback from the core team if you do that

Update jango-filter version
@carlosmart626
Copy link
Author

Thanks for your feedback @BossGrand I'm going to work to fix the issues and create a new pull request.

@carlosmart626 carlosmart626 reopened this Mar 29, 2017
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 29, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.6%) to 94.371% when pulling 6f4cf3c on CarlosMart626:master into 1139507 on graphql-python:master.

@carlosmart626
Copy link
Author

After a lot of testing I've updated and pass all tests. Created auth mixins to require permissions at nodes and mutations also created AuthDjangoFilterConnectionField to create filters with permissions required.

@carlosmart626 carlosmart626 changed the title Django permissions required at Nodes and Mutations Django permissions required at Nodes, Mutations and DjangoFilterConnectionField Mar 29, 2017
@carlosmart626
Copy link
Author

Hi @syrusakbary, I would like to have your feedback about these changes. I don't know if it fits in the project or if there is something to review and do it better.

Thanks.

@syrusakbary syrusakbary force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from bdc7189 to f93251b Compare September 1, 2017 08:12
@spockNinja
Copy link
Contributor

We definitely need some sort of permissions implementation. There have been a few different approaches proposed. I will try to aggregate the ideas and get discussion for which one we should implement.

@carlosmart626
Copy link
Author

Hi @spockNinja I've done some changes to this solution to add more flexibility. Can I help upgrading this solution to version 2.0?

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants