I want to change some existing Python code that uses flask_admin. One of the views uses inline_models with the (ClassName, Options) declaration pattern. The inlined class has, amongst others, a text field.
I want to change the flask_admin default behaviour in the following ways:
I want to make the text field read-only. I.e. still display it, but prevent the user from changing existing content.
I do not want to allow users to delete instances of the inlined class, i.e. I want to get rid of the "Delete?" checkbox next to every entry.
I want to override the default "Add Item" button behaviour with some custom JavaScript.
I did some Googling around but anything that looked potentially promising also looked very non-trivial. I'm hoping for some reasonably straight forward way to achieve this.
Your help would be much appreciated.
Yeesh. It looks like we're out in poorly-documented territory, here. It's hard to know if I'm improving on what you've already found, but I'll hope you're looking for something easier than writing a custom administrative view template.
Following the calls, it looks like the options dictionary eventually gets passed to the constructor of InlineBaseFormAdmin where the various form_* keys are extracted and applied (not sure all are respected, but I see at least form_base_class, form_columns, form_excluded_columns, form_args, form_extra_fields, form_rules, form_label, form_column_labels, form_widget_args). I think you can accomplish what you need via form_widget_args, but you can probably also get there via form_rules or by overriding InlineBaseFormAdmin's get_form or postprocess_form methods:
class SomeModelView(MyBaseModelView):
...
inline_models = [(db.SomeOtherModel, {
"form_widget_args": {
"uneditable_field_name": {"readonly": True}
}
})]
...
The delete option can be controlled by providing your own inline form model to override display_row_controls:
from flask_admin.contrib.sqla.form import InlineModelConverter
from flask_admin.contrib.sqla.fields import InlineModelFormList
class CrouchingTigerHiddenModelFormList(InlineModelFormList):
def display_row_controls(self, field): return False
class MyInlineModelConverter(InlineModelConverter):
inline_field_list_type = CustomInlineModelFormList
#adding to above example
class SomeModelView(MyBaseModelView):
...
inline_model_form_converter = MyInlineModelConverter
inline_models = [(db.SomeOtherModel, {
"form_widget_args": {
"uneditable_field_name": {"readonly": True}
}
})]
...
NOTE: The widget args, such as readonly, are getting passed on to wtforms as render_kw, but at a blush the WTForms docs aren't clear that these get expressed as attributes in the resulting HTML input element (so any HTML input element attributes are valid here).
It looks like form.js controls this behavior, so you should be able to monkey-patch its addInlineField method to execute your own code before or after the model addition. You could override the create and/or edit templates for this--but if you're using flask-admin 1.5.0+, this might be as simple as adding extra_js = ["your-custom.js"] to the view class (caution: it looks like this script gets included on every page for this view).
Related
I'm using Odoo 10. After a new user sign up (through localhost:8069/web/signup) i want him to be automatically allocated inside a group i created on my very own custom module (the user will need authentication from an admin later on so he can be converted to a regular portal user; after signup he will receive restricted access).
I have tried many things. My latest effort looks like this:
class RestrictAccessOnSignup(auth_signup_controller.AuthSignupHome):
def do_signup(self, *args):
super(RestrictAccessOnSignup, self).do_signup(*args)
request.env['res.groups'].sudo().write({'groups_id': 'group_unuser'})
Note that I have import odoo.addons.auth_signup.controllers.main as auth_signup_controller so that I can override the auth_signup controller.
I have located that method as the responsible for doing the signup. So I call it in my new method and then try to change the newly created user's group_id.
What i miss is a fundamental understanding of how to overwrite a field's value from another model inside a controller method context. I'm using the 'request' object although i'm not sure of it. I have seen people using 'self.pool['res.users'] (e.g.) for such purposes but i don't understand how to apply it inside my problem's context.
I believe, also, that there is a way to change the default group for a user after it is created (i would like to know), but i also want to understand how to solve the general problem (accessing and overwriting a field's value from another module).
Another weird thing is that the field groups_id does exist in 'res.users' model, but it does not appear as a column in my pgAdmin interface when i click to see the 'res.users' table... Any idea why?
Thanks a lot!
i don't know if after calling :
super(RestrictAccessOnSignup,self).do_signup(*args)
you will have access to user record in request object but if so just add
the group to user like this, if not you have to find where the user record or id is saved after calling do_signup because you need to update that record to ad this group.
# create env variable i hate typing even i'm typing here ^^
env = request.env
env.user.sudo().write({'groups_id': [
# in odoo relation field accept a list of commands
# command 4 means add the id in the second position must be an integer
# ref return an object so we return the id
( 4, env.ref('your_module_name.group_unuser').id),
]
})
and if changes are not committed in database you may need to commit them
request.env.cr.commit()
Note: self.env.ref you must pass the full xmlID.
This is what worked for me:
def do_signup(self, *args):
super(RestrictAccessOnSignup, self).do_signup(*args)
group_id = request.env['ir.model.data'].get_object('academy2', 'group_unuser')
group_id.sudo().write({'users': [(4, request.env.uid)]})
In the get_object i pass as arguments the 'module' and the 'xmlID' of the group i want to fetch.
It is still not clear to me why 'ir.model.data' is the environment used, but this works as a charm. Please note that here we are adding a user to the group, and not a group to the user, and to me that actually makes more sense.
Any further elucidation or parallel solutions are welcome, the methods aren't as clear to me as they should be.
thanks.
I am making a Flask application that is essentially form-based and so I'm using WTForms and Flask-wtf.
I am currently refactoring my code so my whole form uses WTForms and there is a very dynamic part of one of the forms that I am unable to implement using WTForms. I have no clue how to do it, my initial ideas didn't work, I can't find references or tutorials covering my problem and so this is why I ask for help.
So, the form in question allows users to submit objects that consist of:
A label (StringField, easy)
A Description (TextAreaField, also easy; although I had trouble to make a default value work)
A list of property of the form (predicate, object), where predicate is taken from a pre-built list and object can basically be anything but each predicate will generate a specific object (for instance, the predicate "related to" will expect another object (that comes from a dropdown list) and the predicate "resource" will expect a http link of some sort). This list can be empty.
As you can guess I have trouble with the list. The way the code works right now, I get the label and description using wtforms, and the property list is generated using a config constant (that is used throughout the code so I only have one place to edit if I want to add new properties) and a dynamic menu in javascript that creates (here, for predicates) fields, that I can then get using flask.request.form object in the view function. All the hidden fields for predicates have the same name attribute and all the hidden fields for objects have the same name attribute.
Here is what the view of the form looks like, initialized with a few properties:
http://i.imgur.com/bfMG95s.png
Under the "Propriétés" label you have a dropdown to select the predicate, the second field is displayed or hidden depending on the selected predicate (can be a dropdown or a text field), and it is only when you click on "Ajouter propriété" ("Add property") that a new line is added in the tab below and the fields are generated.
I'd like not to have to change anything on this side because it works very well, makes the form very intuitive and is basically exactly what I want it to be from the user's end.
This is what my custom Form looks like right now (it doesn't work and properties stays empty whatever the number of fields I submit with the form):
class PropertyForm(Form):
property_predicate = HiddenField(
validators=[AnyOf(values=app.config["PROPERTY_LIST"].keys())]
)
property_object = HiddenField(
validators=[DataRequired()]
)
class CategoryForm(Form):
"""
Custom form class for creating a category with the absolute minimal
attributes (label and description)
"""
label = StringField(
"Nom de la categorie (obligatoire)",
validators=[DataRequired()]
)
description = TextAreaField(
"Description de la categorie (obligatoire)",
validators=[DataRequired()]
)
properties = FieldList(FormField(PropertyForm),validators=[Optional()])
And here is what I'd love to do in my views.py code (that I am currently refactoring):
def cat_editor():
cat_form = CategoryForm()
if request.method == "GET":
# Do GET stuff and display the form
return render_template("cateditor.html", form=cat_form, varlist=template_var_list)
else if request.method == "POST":
if cat_form.validate_on_submit():
# Get values from form
category_label = cat_form.label.data
category_description = cat_form.description.data
category_properties = cat_form.properties.data
# Do POST stuff and compute things
return redirect(url_for("index"))
else:
# form didn't validate so we return the form so the template can display the errors
return render_template("cateditor.html", form=cat_form,
template_var_list = template_var_list)
The basic structure works perfectly, it's just that damn dynamic list I can't get to work properly.
Getting label and description from the WTForms CategoryForm instance works fine, but properties always return an empty list. Ideally I'd love to be able to get a list of the form [(predicate1, property1), (predicate2, object2) ... ] when calling cat_form.properties.data (this is why I have a FieldList of FormFields with two HiddenField in each) but I'd have no problem having to build such a list from two list as long as it's using WTForms. Any idea? Thanks a lot :)
I found out what the problem was by playing around with FieldList objects and append_entry() to see what HTML code would Flask-wtf generate if I was to make a prepopulated property list.
My Javascript was generating hidden fields with all the same name, as from what I understood that WTForms is able to aggregate fields with the same name to create lists. Problem is, those similarly named fields were part of a FormField itself nested in a FieldList object name properties.
In order for the WTForms Form object to discern a set of hidden fields from another, when you nest FormFields inside a FieldList it prefixes the FormFields field names with "FieldList_name-index-". Which means what WTForms was expecting was something like
<input type="hidden", name="properties-0-property_predicate" value=...>
<input type="hidden", name="properties-0-property_object" value=...>
<input type="hidden", name="properties-1-property_predicate" value=...>
<input type="hidden", name="properties-1-property_object" value=...>
<input type="hidden", name="properties-2-property_predicate" value=...>
<input type="hidden", name="properties-2-property_object" value=...>
I modified my javascript so it generates the appropriate names. Now when I call cat_form.properties.data I have something that looks like:
[{"property_predicate": "comment", "property_object":"bleh"},
{"property_predicate": "comment", "property_object": "bleh2"}]
And that is exactly what I need. For some reason the form doesn't validate but at least I know how to make WTForms extract data my javascript-generated hidden fields, which is what the problem was.
Edit: Form validation happens because you have to insert a CSRF hidden input with your csrf to every subform you generate with the FormField.
Use jQuery for the more dynamic elements/ behavior in your form(s). Note that form fields have a hidden property (or method, depending e.g., if you're using bootstrap), allowing you to render everything you might need, but only show fields when these are necessary, and hiding them otherwise. Dynamically adding fields is a bit harder, but not really impossible. Is there a limit to the number of fields associated with properties? if yes, i'd just render the maximum number of fields (as long as it's reasonable, up to 5 seems OK, when you get to double digits as a maximum number of properties a user can add, rendering a bunch of fields you'll never use gets to be inelegant).
Here's a good place to see how that would work. Of course, you have another problem of choosing when to hide or show relevant fields, but that can also be handled by a javascript/jQuery script, using jQuery's .change() event. Something like this:
$("#dropdown").change(function () {
var chosen_val = $(this).val();
if (chosen_val == 'banana'){$('#property1').show();} else {$('#property1').hide();}
});
This code will probably not work, and is definitely lacking proper logic but should give you an idea of how to approach this issue using jQuery. Note that 'property1' field is always there, waiting to be shown if the user chooses the right dropdown value.
I have a base template for when a user is logged in, and on that base template, I need to add user specific options in a drop down menu. This drop down menu with options must be constant across all handlers, i.e., any time the base template is invoked (extended) with a child template.
Other than performing the necessary DB query, assigning the query results to a variable, and passing that variable to every handler (there are many), how can I consolidate this into one query and one variable, which gets passed directly to the base template? I am using jinja2 templates as well.
I would hate to do something so cumbersome in exchange for something far more simple and maintainable.
Any ideas? Thanks.
EDIT
So I still haven't found anything that's exactly what I'm looking for; however, I decided to at least make some headway in the interim. So, I made a custom decorator that takes a view's returned dict() and appends the appropriate data to it. For example:
def get_base_data(func):
def wrapper(request):
d = func(request)
user_id = request.user.id # used in query
contact_group_data = ContactGroups.query.filter(...criteria...).all()
d['contact_group_data'] = contact_group_data
return d
return wrapper
Now, I can at least decorate each method very concisely and simply by putting:
#view_config(...)
#get_base_data
def my_handler(request):
pass # rest of code...
This is one of most inobvious things in Pyramid and took a while to find for me, too.
You can modify the global template context in BeforeRender event.
http://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/pyramid/en/latest/narr/hooks.html#using-the-before-render-event
Alternatively, you could use class based views, inherit all your views from one base view class which has get_base_data(), then the class instance is passed to the template context to all your views and then you could extract the data with {{ view.get_base_data }}.
http://ruslanspivak.com/2012/03/02/class-based-views-in-pyramid/
I vouch for the latter approach as it is more beautiful, predictable and easier to maintain engineering wise.
You can add a 'view' for a content type in kotti by doing something along these lines:
from kotti_mysite.views import poll_view
config.add_view(
poll_view,
context=Poll,
name='view',
permission='view',
renderer='kotti_mysite:templates/poll.pt',
)
(more details: http://kotti.readthedocs.org/en/latest/first_steps/tut-2.html)
You can also have multiple views, and use the 'set default view', but sometimes it's convenient to have several similar views with very similar urls.
For example, in plone, its trivial to have a url structure like this:
/blah/item/ <--- Normal view
/blah/item/json <--- Json version of item
/blah/item/pdf <--- PDF download of item
You can... sort of, do a similar thing in kotti by screwing with the view you create and rendering different content based on get/post params, but it's messy, and frankly, rather rubbish.
The only solution I've found is to have a custom content type 'JsonView' that has a json renderer, and add it as a child of the parent object, and it's renderer looks for the parent content, and renders that.
However, doing this requires you to manually create a 'JsonView' child for every instance of the type you want, which is also rather cumbersome.
Is there a better way of doing this?
--
Nb. Specifically note that having a custom view /blah/item/json isn't any use at all; any type of item, in any parent folder should be able to render in the way described above; using a single static route isn't the right solution.
You can register a json view for all your content like this:
from kotti.interfaces import IContent
config.add_view(
my_json_view,
context=IContent,
name='json',
permission='view',
renderer='json',
)
This way, when you open /blah/json, where /blah points to some content, it will call your my_json_view view.
SQLAlchemy's new class object inspection system might help you write a useful generic json view that works for more than one content type. Alternatively, you can register your view for specific content types only (by use of a more specific context argument in config.add_view).
Using renderer='json' you tell Pyramid that you want to use its json renderer.
I would like for a particular django-tastypie model resource to have only a subset of fields when listing objects, and all fields when showing a detail. Is this possible?
You can also now use the use_in attribute on a field to specify the relevant resource to show the field in. This can either be list or detail, or a callback.
You would have to specify all fields in the actual ModelResource then override the get_list method to filter out only the fields you want to show. See the internal implementation of get_list on Resource to see how to override it.
However, note this will only apply on GET requests, you should still be able to POST/PUT/PATCH on the resource with all fields if you authorization limits allow you to do so.
In a nut shell, you want to hot patch the internal field list before full_dehydrate is called on all ORM objects returned by obj_get_list.
Alternatively, you can let the full dehydrate mechanism take place and just at the end of it remove the fields you don't want to show if you don't care about squeezing out as much as speed as possible. Of course you would need to do this only if the URL is invoked as a consequence of get_list call. There is a convenience method for this alter_list_data_to_serialize(request, to_be_serialized).
Just do:
class SomeResource(Resource):
class Meta(...):
...
field_list_to_remove = [ 'field1', 'field2' ]
...
def alter_list_data_to_serialize(request, to_be_serialized):
for obj in to_be_serialized['objects']:
for field_name in self._meta.field_list_to_remove:
del obj.data[field_name]
return to_be_serialized
There is an open issue for this on GitHub, with a number of workarounds suggested there.
Can also use the dehydrate(self, bundle) method.
def dehydrate(self, bundle):
del bundle.data['attr-to-del]
return bundle