Validating model.CheckConstraints

[thisisjab]

As far as I am concerned, DRF does not automatically support checking for database constraints defined in model._meta.constrainst when it comes to serializer-level validation. Is there any reason why not?

I am really determined to create a PR for this feature, but realized that DRF doesn't accept any new feature:

At this point in its lifespan we consider Django REST framework to be feature-complete. We focus on pull requests that track the continued development of Django versions, and generally do not accept new features or code formatting changes.

Why is that?

[browniebroke]

I think this feature was added to Django a few versions back but that arrived at the time when DRF development slowed down, so support wasn't added until recently. There is currently partial support for it and some improvements were recently contributed, but some are :

• Primary Support of UniqueConstraint #7438 (released)
• Fix raising on nullable fields part of UniqueConstraint #9531 ()
• Fix unique together validator doesn't respect condition's fields #9360 (not yet merged at time of writing)

[thisisjab]

I specifically mean check constraints which are not checked. The problem is database integrity errors occur if check constraints are not handled during development and inside serializer. I am pleased and eager to contribute to this by developing support for check constraint handling inside serializer.

[auvipy]

I specifically mean check constraints which are not checked. The problem is database integrity errors occur if check constraints are not handled during development and inside serializer. I am pleased and eager to contribute to this by developing support for check constraint handling inside serializer.

Anything that is in new django versions but not fully supported in DRF are high prority for us. so you can start working on missing django features in DRF. because those are needed for compatibility issues. ping me with a draft PR and here is a somewhat related issue #7173

[thisisjab]

Ok. Thanks a lot.