From 1f9d00ef9f6e6a76433b1239f19b6fd64a07b7ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mariusz Felisiak Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:54:38 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] [4.2.x] Added missing backticks in docs. Backport of 02376f1f53db24039c200ef4818d96accf16a88b from main --- docs/ref/models/options.txt | 2 +- docs/releases/1.8.2.txt | 5 +++-- docs/topics/db/transactions.txt | 2 +- 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/ref/models/options.txt b/docs/ref/models/options.txt index 06bf09fba07..6f318b2df8d 100644 --- a/docs/ref/models/options.txt +++ b/docs/ref/models/options.txt @@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ not be looking at your Django code. For example:: unique_together = ["driver", "restaurant"] A :class:`~django.db.models.ManyToManyField` cannot be included in - unique_together. (It's not clear what that would even mean!) If you + ``unique_together``. (It's not clear what that would even mean!) If you need to validate uniqueness related to a :class:`~django.db.models.ManyToManyField`, try using a signal or an explicit :attr:`through ` model. diff --git a/docs/releases/1.8.2.txt b/docs/releases/1.8.2.txt index 4e03a0e1de8..db1f8bf909a 100644 --- a/docs/releases/1.8.2.txt +++ b/docs/releases/1.8.2.txt @@ -48,8 +48,9 @@ Bugfixes * Fixed ``isnull`` lookup for ``HStoreField`` (:ticket:`24751`). -* Fixed a MySQL crash when a migration removes a combined index (unique_together - or index_together) containing a foreign key (:ticket:`24757`). +* Fixed a MySQL crash when a migration removes a combined index ( + ``unique_together`` or ``index_together``) containing a foreign key + (:ticket:`24757`). * Fixed session cookie deletion when using :setting:`SESSION_COOKIE_DOMAIN` (:ticket:`24799`). diff --git a/docs/topics/db/transactions.txt b/docs/topics/db/transactions.txt index 23fe1e8a810..2eba10496b8 100644 --- a/docs/topics/db/transactions.txt +++ b/docs/topics/db/transactions.txt @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ will fail with the error "current transaction is aborted, queries ignored until end of transaction block". While the basic use of ``save()`` is unlikely to raise an exception in PostgreSQL, there are more advanced usage patterns which might, such as saving objects with unique fields, saving using the -force_insert/force_update flag, or invoking custom SQL. +``force_insert``/``force_update`` flag, or invoking custom SQL. There are several ways to recover from this sort of error.