Add regression test for bulk_create with M2M field using explicit related_name

[benaduo]

Summary

• Adds a regression test to TestCreateM2MWhenBulkCreate covering the scenario
  reported in baker.make() with _bulk_create=True fails for M2M-fields that have a reverse_name #489: calling baker.make() with _bulk_create=True on a model
  whose ManyToManyField defines an explicit related_name
• Uses Store.customers (related_name="favorite_stores") with _quantity=10,
  asserting that all bulk-created instances have the correct M2M rows populated

Motivation

Issue #489 reported a TypeError where the through-table constructor was being
called with the related_name as a keyword argument
(Store_customers(favorite_stores=...)). That bug was fixed in a prior release,
but no regression test was ever added for this specific case, leaving the fix
unguarded against future regressions.

Changes

• tests/test_baker.py: add test_create_with_field_with_related_name to
  TestCreateM2MWhenBulkCreate

Testing

pytest tests/test_baker.py::TestCreateM2MWhenBulkCreate -v

Author

Benjamin Aduo (@benaduo)

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Added coverage verifying bulk-create behavior for many-to-many relationships, ensuring related entries are correctly associated when populated via a field with an explicit related name.

[benaduo]

The ty linter failures in this CI run are unrelated to the changes in this PR.

All 13 errors flagged by ty check model_bakery are in pre-existing code:

• baker.py:623 — other_fields_to_skip.extend([GenericRelation, GenericForeignKey])
• baker.py:707 — values = values()
• generators.py:119–137 — conditional field mappings (ArrayField, HStoreField, CICharField, etc.)
• generators.py:150 — return type of get_type_mapping()

None of these lines were modified by this PR. The same errors appear on PR #583 and would affect any PR raised today. Cross-referencing against the last successfully merged PR (#576, Feb 19), the ty check was passing at that point — this appears to be a regression introduced by a ty version upgrade in the CI environment since then (the CI downloads ty fresh on each run without a pinned version).

Happy to address these in a separate PR if that would be helpful, but they are out of scope for this change.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 62214833-a356-4be5-9bbd-f33d1303ec2d

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d7cfd19 and ccd776c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• tests/test_baker.py

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• tests/test_baker.py

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Added a new Django DB test test_create_with_field_with_related_name that bulk-creates Store instances with a customers many-to-many field (using _bulk_create=True and _quantity=10) and asserts the M2M through-table correctly links each created Store to the original Person.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
M2M Bulk Create Test tests/test_baker.py	Add TestCreateM2MWhenBulkCreate::test_create_with_field_with_related_name to verify M2M population for fields with an explicit related_name when using _bulk_create and _quantity.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• Fix _bulk_create for ManyToManyField with custom through models (#477) #570: Adds/adjusts bulk-create M2M handling and through-model FK name resolution that this test exercises.

Poem

🐰 I hopped into tests with a joyful cheer,
Bulk-made ten stores with one friend near.
Through-table bridges now snug and tight,
Customers and stores connected right.
Hooray for green tests in the moonlight! 🥕

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 33.33% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: adding a regression test for bulk_create with M2M fields that have explicit related_name.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

📝 Coding Plan

• Generate coding plan for human review comments

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@tests/test_baker.py`:
- Around line 1273-1274: The test only samples two stores (s1, s2) but should
verify every bulk-created Store row; replace the sliced selection that uses
models.Store.objects.all()[:2] with iterating over all stores
(models.Store.objects.all()) and assert for each Store instance (e.g., variable
name like store) that list(store.customers.all()) == [person] so every created
row is checked rather than just the first two.

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 2402320d-04c8-4ddf-8a6e-d2bde93feda0

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2293b5b and d7cfd19.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• tests/test_baker.py

[amureki]

Fantastic, thank you very much for noting that it was missing a regression test and adding it! 🙌