UserViewSet vs view per action

[tomwojcik]

In Djoser 1.x, we utilized a set of views, each handling a specific action. Then came Djoser 2.x, introducing the mighty UserViewSet. IMO it's very simple to register and configure, but for some it might look a bit overwhelming.

For example, Allauth uses the opposite approach. They have one view per action. It's easier to follow, but results in having much more code.

All feedback welcome!

[insspb]

Separate views are much more useful approach.
If you want to adjust existed viewset and remove some functionalyty you will have a much more code, and it will be completely unclear in some places.
When we talk about security/auth modules, usually you want to include only parts that you really need, completely excluding any code, that can became accidently 'enabled'.

[mdefeche]

I prefer an opt in approach than an opt out. With an opt out approach, newly added endpoints are automatically included which IMHO doesn't make sense from a security point of view

[GrbavaCigla]

It's been 5 months since this discussion was started and 3.5 years since the original discussion at #549. I think we won't get more votes than we have got now. I would like to implement the proposed method, would that be merged if maintainers are happy with the solution?

[GrbavaCigla]

Just to clarify, we are not doing this?

[tomwojcik]

No. We want a similar approach to allauth, so one view per action. This will solve many other requests, such as

#416

One other thing we want to avoid is having a mixin for a mixin of a base with a mixin... Applies to both, views and serializers. We will figure it out together during the CR, just wanted to highlight this in advance.

I've created a branch, feel free to set release/3.0.0 as the target. It's fine if you push WIP in small batches. The only thing that's needed, I'd say, is the CI being 🍏 .

Don't bother with updating the docs for now. Lets have a draft that we will built on top of.

Thanks for help @GrbavaCigla ! Looking forward for your changes.

[tomwojcik]

@GrbavaCigla I will try to address this today. Please push changes if you have them.

[tomwojcik]

@GrbavaCigla @haxoza plz CR #820

[GrbavaCigla]

Sorry, I thought this would be less work and I am currently very busy. I skimmed through the changes at #820 and it looks good to me.