Open svametcalf opened 6 years ago
Currently meta
is not supported with ResourceRelatedField
but would be a good addition.
That your second approach is not working is most likely a bug. What you could do is to work around it to define a included_serializers with the objective
relationship and define the correct resource_name.
Marking this issue as a bug, any investigation and PRs are most welcome.
Is Meta still not supported with ResourceRelatedField
(as shown in the first example above)?
Even if it is not supported I figured it should be possible with a similar approach as used in https://github.com/django-json-api/django-rest-framework-json-api/discussions/1018.
Any suggestion what function to overwrite if I would like to add 1 meta field to a SerializerMethodResourceRelatedField
(to data, not links)?
No, this has not been implemented yet.
To implement it, I would suggest that a get_meta(rself, esource)
returning a dict is added to ResourceRelatedField
and then called at the appropriate spot in the renderer. A user can then create its own ResourceRelatedField
with the desired meta fields.
Any PR is welcome.
I have a setup where we are using a ManyToMany field with a through model, similar to the situation described in this forum post from the json-api spec .
It seems like there are two ways of approaching this. One would be to use the
meta
key in the relationship, such as:Is this possible in using this library?
On the other hand, I could have the relationship point to the
through
model, which would be formatted as such:Right now in my app, the response does not respect the
through
key when using a ResourceRelatedField. The resulting responserelationships
key has a type ofobjective
, as opposed toobjective-concept-link
.Are either of these solutions possible with this library? If so, how?