Deprecated usage of type field name

[sliverc]

Deprecating of #376

Description of the Change

Partial support for field name type was added in #376 but only for non polymorphic fields.

However as per specification type must not be a field name and therefore must be forbidden in DJA as well.

Some dependents might depend on being allowed to have a field name type so deprecating it now and remove it in next major version.

Checklist

• PR only contains one change (considered splitting up PR)
• unit-test added
• documentation updated
• CHANGELOG.md updated (only for user relevant changes)
• author name in AUTHORS

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #993 (a79a0a0) into master (e17ea57) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #993   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.84%   96.84%           
=======================================
  Files          65       65           
  Lines        3929     3933    +4     
=======================================
+ Hits         3805     3809    +4     
  Misses        124      124           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
rest_framework_json_api/parsers.py	98.59% <ø> (ø)
example/tests/test_model_viewsets.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_serializers.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
example/serializers.py	89.78% <0.00%> (+0.16%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e17ea57...a79a0a0. Read the comment docs.

[auvipy]

won;t this break that PR? can any alternative name could be used?

[sliverc]

won;t this break that PR? can any alternative name could be used?

The issue is that type is per JSON:API specification a reserved word for the resource type and therefore it may not be used as field name. So PR #376 should not have been merged in the first place which added a workaround to be able to use type as field name in some circumstances.

[auvipy]

ok. fair enough. can field_type be used instead? don't get annoyed by my questions btw

[sliverc]

@auvipy If you are talking about if an application using DJA already has a serializer with a field name type. Yes in such a case you can simply rename the field name to field_type and it will work.

[auvipy]

thats great!