yes/no option for BooleanField

Reverting spam close.

Shouldn't be hard to do in newforms-admin. Adrian likes it. Let's promote to accepted.

Adds a custom boolean field widget to the admin interface.

See attached improved patch + unit test. Unit tests check out and have been run against sqlite (since there is no db specific things going on here I deemed that to be enough)

I've changed the naming to AdminBooleanSelectWidget? for the widget itself, to match the naming pattern of other widget.

The widget uses it's own RadioFieldRenderer?, this is done to enable the <ul> that will be rendered to use the css plainlist layout, otherwise both radioselects would be rendered with square bullets in front of them in the Admin.

Also added are tests to see whether the hooks in BaseModelAdmin? work (those that bind specific widgets to certain fields), to booleanfield is of course tested.

Improved patch with tests

Improved patch with tests

Why hasn't this been checked in? It seems like it's ready. I'd really like this feature without having to patch Django.

This can be easily done without patching Django and it really is a new feature and not fixing a bug. Marking post-1.0.

This shouldn't be supplying a widget only for the admin interface. Will no other application ever use boolean fields? If we're adding a widget, it's generally going to either be worthy of putting into django/forms/widgets.py or not including at all; there are very few cases when a specialised widget just for admin is appropriate.

So, let's move the widget to a more useful place.

Secondly, the tests here are kind of confusing (all the hooked widget stuff). They seem to be trying to enforce something about admin widget overrides that I'm not sure is actually correct (why can't those things ever change?). Whilst tests are good, those tests aren't testing that this widget behaves correctly; they're trying to test some other incidental behaviour. So let's move those to another patch so that when we resolve how to do better custom widget overrides in admin they can be part of that. At the moment they're distracting a bit from the issue at hand and I'm not sure that if they were to fail it would actually mean there's a problem in Django's public behaviour (they're internal implementation details, as far as I can tell).

Thirdly, it looks unnecessary to have strings like u'1' for the choices. Just use integers there. The point is that there's no need to do all this forcing to strings and it makes the reader wonder why you're doing that. If you used 0 and 1 for the choice values, then you'd simplify a lot of the code, too, since bool(value) would give the right integer -> boolean conversion and int(value) would give the right choice value for both boolean and integer input.

Finally, please don't mark your own patches as "ready for checkin". I suspect this went unreviewed for so long because it was in that state and we hadn't realised it hadn't been through a review.