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

Potential contribution: filebrowser-browse-upload #333

Closed
andybak opened this issue Jun 22, 2017 · 6 comments
Closed

Potential contribution: filebrowser-browse-upload #333

andybak opened this issue Jun 22, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@andybak
Copy link

andybak commented Jun 22, 2017

https://github.com/DjangoAdminHackers/django-filebrowser-browse-upload-field

We find this incredibly useful and it's become our default replacement for FileField and ImageField on all projects. It's been in production for over a year now and is fairly solid.

I'd be curious to see if it's useful to other people (or indeed maybe even worthy of being added to this project). It's based on the filebrowse field but I think it gives a better overall user experience for typical use-cases.

  1. It's not tested on the 3.7 branch
  2. It's not tested on the main django-filebrowser repo - I use the no-grappelli fork
  3. It's not been tested outside our standard CMS deployment - there might be a dependency somewhere that I've not thought about.
@int-ua
Copy link

int-ua commented Jul 17, 2017

Can it be used just for the widget, without changing field type?

@andybak
Copy link
Author

andybak commented Jul 17, 2017

So - you are using django-filebrowser?

Why does it matter that the field type changes? The underlying database representation is the same.

@int-ua
Copy link

int-ua commented Jul 17, 2017

  1. Yes.
  2. Because we are already using a custom subclassed ImageField. And I'd like to make less modifications, I'm not sure why field type change needed. Because it allows some per-field settings? Can't they in theory be specified on the widget itself?

@sehmaschine
Copy link
Owner

@andybak you never added a PR. should we close this issue?

@sehmaschine
Copy link
Owner

see also #236

@sehmaschine
Copy link
Owner

closing this since no PR has been made.

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

3 participants