Project

Profile

Help

Task #6421

closed

Review of write_only fields in pulp and plugins

Added by daviddavis almost 4 years ago. Updated almost 4 years ago.

Status:
CLOSED - COMPLETE
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
-
Sprint/Milestone:
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:
Platform Release:
Groomed:
No
Sprint Candidate:
No
Tags:
Sprint:
Sprint 73
Quarter:

Description

In #6346, we are trying to fix the problem where write_only fields are not showing up in the api schema. We think though that most of the use of write_only fields are unnecessary. In some cases, a serializer with write_only fields can be split in two: one for read operations and one for write operations. In other cases, write_only fields can be converted to SecretCharFields.

This task is to go through and try to eliminate write_only field usage when possible. From there we can examine which use cases still require use of write_only fields.


Related issues

Related to Container Support - Task #6823: Remove write_only from fields that don't require itCLOSED - CURRENTRELEASEdaviddavis

Actions
Blocks Pulp - Issue #6346: Remote fields username and password not showing up in REST docsCLOSED - CURRENTRELEASEfao89Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF