internlm/SWE-Fixer-Train-110K huggingface dataset:
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
Technical error handlers
The default 404 and 500 error handlers return HTML. It'd be nice if we provided alternative error handlers that'd respond with either JSON or HTML as appropriate.



Discussion:
I'm going to de-milestone this for now. It's clear enough. Happy to take a PR. etc. 

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/exceptions.py b/rest_framework/exceptions.py
--- a/rest_framework/exceptions.py
+++ b/rest_framework/exceptions.py
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
 
 import math
 
+from django.http import JsonResponse
 from django.utils import six
 from django.utils.encoding import force_text
 from django.utils.translation import ugettext_lazy as _
@@ -235,3 +236,23 @@ def __init__(self, wait=None, detail=None, code=None):
                                      wait))))
         self.wait = wait
         super(Throttled, self).__init__(detail, code)
+
+
+def server_error(request, *args, **kwargs):
+    """
+    Generic 500 error handler.
+    """
+    data = {
+        'error': 'Server Error (500)'
+    }
+    return JsonResponse(data, status=status.HTTP_500_INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR)
+
+
+def bad_request(request, exception, *args, **kwargs):
+    """
+    Generic 400 error handler.
+    """
+    data = {
+        'error': 'Bad Request (400)'
+    }
+    return JsonResponse(data, status=status.HTTP_400_BAD_REQUEST)


Test patch:
diff --git a/tests/test_exceptions.py b/tests/test_exceptions.py
--- a/tests/test_exceptions.py
+++ b/tests/test_exceptions.py
@@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
+# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
 from __future__ import unicode_literals
 
-from django.test import TestCase
+from django.test import RequestFactory, TestCase
 from django.utils import six, translation
 from django.utils.translation import ugettext_lazy as _
 
 from rest_framework.exceptions import (
-    APIException, ErrorDetail, Throttled, _get_error_details
+    APIException, ErrorDetail, Throttled, _get_error_details, bad_request,
+    server_error
 )
 
 
@@ -87,3 +89,18 @@ def test_message(self):
         # this test largely acts as a sanity test to ensure the translation files are present.
         self.assertEqual(_('A server error occurred.'), 'Une erreur du serveur est survenue.')
         self.assertEqual(six.text_type(APIException()), 'Une erreur du serveur est survenue.')
+
+
+def test_server_error():
+    request = RequestFactory().get('/')
+    response = server_error(request)
+    assert response.status_code == 500
+    assert response["content-type"] == 'application/json'
+
+
+def test_bad_request():
+    request = RequestFactory().get('/')
+    exception = Exception('Something went wrong — Not used')
+    response = bad_request(request, exception)
+    assert response.status_code == 400
+    assert response["content-type"] == 'application/json'
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
rest_framework.exceptions.ErrorDetail is unhashable after commit #5787
Commit #5787 makes class rest_framework.exceptions.ErrorDetail unhashable. This breaks functionality of some third-party libraries (like https://github.com/FutureMind/drf-friendly-errors). 

## Checklist

- [x] I have verified that that issue exists against the `master` branch of Django REST framework.
- [x] I have searched for similar issues in both open and closed tickets and cannot find a duplicate.
- [x] This is not a usage question. (Those should be directed to the [discussion group](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/django-rest-framework) instead.)
- [x] This cannot be dealt with as a third party library. (We prefer new functionality to be [in the form of third party libraries](http://www.django-rest-framework.org/topics/third-party-resources/#about-third-party-packages) where possible.)
- [x] I have reduced the issue to the simplest possible case.
- [ ] I have included a failing test as a pull request. (If you are unable to do so we can still accept the issue.)

## Steps to reproduce

from rest_framework.exceptions import ErrorDetail
err = ErrorDetail('error', code=1)
hash(err)

## Expected behavior

valid hash

## Actual behavior

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<input>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: unhashable type: 'ErrorDetail'



Discussion:
OK. Yes. Since we added `__eq__()` it would be worth adding `__hash__()`

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/exceptions.py b/rest_framework/exceptions.py
--- a/rest_framework/exceptions.py
+++ b/rest_framework/exceptions.py
@@ -91,6 +91,9 @@ def __repr__(self):
             self.code,
         ))
 
+    def __hash__(self):
+        return hash(str(self))
+
 
 class APIException(Exception):
     """


Test patch:
diff --git a/tests/test_exceptions.py b/tests/test_exceptions.py
--- a/tests/test_exceptions.py
+++ b/tests/test_exceptions.py
@@ -81,6 +81,10 @@ def test_str(self):
         assert str(ErrorDetail('msg1')) == 'msg1'
         assert str(ErrorDetail('msg1', 'code')) == 'msg1'
 
+    def test_hash(self):
+        assert hash(ErrorDetail('msg')) == hash('msg')
+        assert hash(ErrorDetail('msg', 'code')) == hash('msg')
+
 
 class TranslationTests(TestCase):
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
DateField does not admit formats error message says are supported
## Checklist

- [x] I have verified that that issue exists against the `master` branch of Django REST framework.
- [x] I have searched for similar issues in both open and closed tickets and cannot find a duplicate.
- [x] This is not a usage question. (Those should be directed to the [discussion group](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/django-rest-framework) instead.)
- [ ] This cannot be dealt with as a third party library. (We prefer new functionality to be [in the form of third party libraries](http://www.django-rest-framework.org/topics/third-party-resources/#about-third-party-packages) where possible.)
- [x] I have reduced the issue to the simplest possible case.
- [ ] I have included a failing test as a pull request. (If you are unable to do so we can still accept the issue.)

## Steps to reproduce

```
>>> class S(serializers.Serializer):
...    d = serializers.DateField()
```

## Expected behaviour
```
>>> S(data={'d': '2018'}).is_valid()
True
```

Based on the error message:
> 'Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY[-MM[-DD]].'

## Actual behaviour
```
>>> S(data={'d': '2018'}).is_valid()
True
```

Note that optional month/days are not being tested:
https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/blob/c2b24f83a3d552845e29b7e3d39acf50beba1b5c/tests/test_fields.py#L1120-L1123

I think what I'd _actually_ expect is the current behaviour, in which case it's the error message that's incorrect. But I don't know which is intended.


Discussion:
Agree that we should change the error message.

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/utils/humanize_datetime.py b/rest_framework/utils/humanize_datetime.py
--- a/rest_framework/utils/humanize_datetime.py
+++ b/rest_framework/utils/humanize_datetime.py
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ def datetime_formats(formats):
 
 
 def date_formats(formats):
-    format = ', '.join(formats).replace(ISO_8601, 'YYYY[-MM[-DD]]')
+    format = ', '.join(formats).replace(ISO_8601, 'YYYY-MM-DD')
     return humanize_strptime(format)
 
 


Test patch:
diff --git a/tests/test_fields.py b/tests/test_fields.py
--- a/tests/test_fields.py
+++ b/tests/test_fields.py
@@ -1122,8 +1122,10 @@ class TestDateField(FieldValues):
         datetime.date(2001, 1, 1): datetime.date(2001, 1, 1),
     }
     invalid_inputs = {
-        'abc': ['Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY[-MM[-DD]].'],
-        '2001-99-99': ['Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY[-MM[-DD]].'],
+        'abc': ['Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY-MM-DD.'],
+        '2001-99-99': ['Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY-MM-DD.'],
+        '2001-01': ['Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY-MM-DD.'],
+        '2001': ['Date has wrong format. Use one of these formats instead: YYYY-MM-DD.'],
         datetime.datetime(2001, 1, 1, 12, 00): ['Expected a date but got a datetime.'],
     }
     outputs = {
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
URLPathVersioning: Use Default Version when It's None (Not Invalid)
## Checklist

- [x] I have verified that that issue exists against the `master` branch of Django REST framework.
- [x] I have searched for similar issues in both open and closed tickets and cannot find a duplicate.
- [x] This is not a usage question. (Those should be directed to the [discussion group](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/django-rest-framework) instead.)
- [x] This cannot be dealt with as a third party library. (We prefer new functionality to be [in the form of third party libraries](https://www.django-rest-framework.org/topics/third-party-resources/#about-third-party-packages) where possible.)
- [x] I have reduced the issue to the simplest possible case.
- [ ] I have included a failing test as a pull request. (If you are unable to do so we can still accept the issue.)

## Steps to reproduce
Allowed Versions: v1, v2
Default Version: v2 (It's latest version as often)
My URL Pattern: `api/((?P<version>(\w){2})/)?users/`

## Expected behavior
1- When GET `api/v1/users/`: get users data according to version v1.
2- When GET `api/users/` :  get users data according to Default-Version.

## Actual behavior
for Case 1: get users data according to version v1.
for Case 2: get 404 error: "Invalid version in URL path."

I think it makes sense when client didn't specified version in URI, he expects get response from latest version as often (not getting error)!


Discussion:

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/versioning.py b/rest_framework/versioning.py
--- a/rest_framework/versioning.py
+++ b/rest_framework/versioning.py
@@ -75,6 +75,9 @@ class URLPathVersioning(BaseVersioning):
 
     def determine_version(self, request, *args, **kwargs):
         version = kwargs.get(self.version_param, self.default_version)
+        if version is None:
+            version = self.default_version
+
         if not self.is_allowed_version(version):
             raise exceptions.NotFound(self.invalid_version_message)
         return version


Test patch:
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
Upgrade to bootstrap 3.4.0 to fix XSS vulnerability
## Description

Picking up Bootstrap `3.4.0` to fix an XSS vulnerability found in `3.3.7`
refs #6178 



Discussion:
@carltongibson fyi. Let me know if there are any additional actions.
 No diff to the CSS? 
@carltongibson Completely forgot about the CSS. They should be added now.
The diff to `bootstrap-theme.min.css` is weird though, it doesn't even match the old 3.3.7 upstream: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/v3.3.7/dist/css/bootstrap-theme.min.css
Not entirely sure what's going on there.

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/__init__.py b/rest_framework/__init__.py
--- a/rest_framework/__init__.py
+++ b/rest_framework/__init__.py
@@ -8,10 +8,10 @@
 """
 
 __title__ = 'Django REST framework'
-__version__ = '3.9.0'
+__version__ = '3.9.1'
 __author__ = 'Tom Christie'
 __license__ = 'BSD 2-Clause'
-__copyright__ = 'Copyright 2011-2018 Tom Christie'
+__copyright__ = 'Copyright 2011-2019 Encode OSS Ltd'
 
 # Version synonym
 VERSION = __version__


Test patch:
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
Incorrect docstring on fields.DictField:to_representation
Remnants of ListField copy-paste confused me when inspecting code.
https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/blob/master/rest_framework/fields.py#L1729


Discussion:

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/fields.py b/rest_framework/fields.py
--- a/rest_framework/fields.py
+++ b/rest_framework/fields.py
@@ -1725,9 +1725,6 @@ def to_internal_value(self, data):
         return self.run_child_validation(data)
 
     def to_representation(self, value):
-        """
-        List of object instances -> List of dicts of primitive datatypes.
-        """
         return {
             six.text_type(key): self.child.to_representation(val) if val is not None else None
             for key, val in value.items()


Test patch:
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
DjangoGuardianObjectPermissionsFilter Broken on django 1.11 with python 2.7
This line unconditionally disables django-guardian from being detected with python 2.7 but it should still work with older releases that don't meet the conditions in the comments:
https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/blob/29cbe574a384c3bcc09434a3a9c5ff0cb7576b99/rest_framework/compat.py#L172


Discussion:
We don't test against older Django-guardian versions so there might be other incompatibilities.
If you are confident enough, I'd suggest you override `DjangoObjectPermissionsFilter.__init__()` to skip the installation check (or perform your own).
Can I suggest that you add a warning into the code in the python2 path as currently the code returns a rather confusing error message that guardian is not installed. You have to dig into the code to find out the information about the incompatibility
@carltongibson do you think we'll have releases before merging Python 2.7 removal PR ?
Yeah. good. I had basically thought no. But it might be worth throwing this in quick... Thoughts? 
Almost everything merged since 3.9.2 has either been a docs fix or a minor code cleanup. We could release 3.9.3 if it's not too much trouble. 

Maybe change the check to:

```python
if six.PY2 and guardian.VERSION >= (1, 5):
    return False
```

From #6054, there were issues importing `guardian`, but since this is a runtime check, it might be fine?
OK. Let’s reopen to assess. I’ve been putting off dropping Python 2, so we may as well look at taking advantage of that. 

Happy to look at a PR adjusting the compat code here. I don’t mind doing the release.
It might be more like:

```python
if six.PY2 and django.version >= (2, 2) and guardian.VERSION >= (1, 5):
    return False
```

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/compat.py b/rest_framework/compat.py
--- a/rest_framework/compat.py
+++ b/rest_framework/compat.py
@@ -168,7 +168,12 @@ def is_guardian_installed():
     """
     django-guardian is optional and only imported if in INSTALLED_APPS.
     """
-    if six.PY2:
+    try:
+        import guardian
+    except ImportError:
+        guardian = None
+
+    if six.PY2 and (not guardian or guardian.VERSION >= (1, 5)):
         # Guardian 1.5.0, for Django 2.2 is NOT compatible with Python 2.7.
         # Remove when dropping PY2.
         return False


Test patch:
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
DeprecationWarning with markdown
Code: https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework/blob/bf9533ae37affc64638c21f551250914dd5f80be/rest_framework/compat.py#L263-L265

Warning:

> DeprecationWarning: Using the add method to register a processor or pattern is deprecated. Use the `register` method instead.

Relevant commit in markdown: https://github.com/Python-Markdown/markdown/commit/6ee07d2735d86d7a3d0b31c3409d42d31997a96c



Discussion:
This'd probably be a good one for a contributor to jump onto, right?

*waves to the world*
Note - we added the "good first issue" label a while back, which theoretically helps new users find issues like these?

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/compat.py b/rest_framework/compat.py
--- a/rest_framework/compat.py
+++ b/rest_framework/compat.py
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ def distinct(queryset, base):
     View.http_method_names = View.http_method_names + ['patch']
 
 
-# Markdown is optional (version 2.6+ required)
+# Markdown is optional (version 3.0+ required)
 try:
     import markdown
 
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ def repl(m):
             return ret.split("\n")
 
     def md_filter_add_syntax_highlight(md):
-        md.preprocessors.add('highlight', CodeBlockPreprocessor(), "_begin")
+        md.preprocessors.register(CodeBlockPreprocessor(), 'highlight', 40)
         return True
 else:
     def md_filter_add_syntax_highlight(md):


Test patch:
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
'ModelField' object has no attribute 'max_length'

![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22879485/45289092-e9259200-b51e-11e8-8444-bed5dd279bff.png)
**I have add max_length,but got a traceback**
```
Traceback:  

.....

File "/webapps/fi-licaishi/env35/lib/python3.5/site-packages/rest_framework/serializers.py" in get_fields
  1054.             fields[field_name] = field_class(**field_kwargs)

File "/webapps/fi-licaishi/env35/lib/python3.5/site-packages/rest_framework/fields.py" in __init__
  1878.                 six.text_type)(max_length=self.max_length)
Exception Type: AttributeError at /api/products/short_products/
Exception Value: 'ModelField' object has no attribute 'max_length'
```
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22879485/45288872-5258d580-b51e-11e8-8572-1309fdaeefa3.png)

**I try change  `max_length=self.max_length` to `max_length=max_length`, it will be work.**
**Is there any other solution?**


Discussion:

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/fields.py b/rest_framework/fields.py
--- a/rest_framework/fields.py
+++ b/rest_framework/fields.py
@@ -1888,9 +1888,9 @@ def __init__(self, model_field, **kwargs):
         self.model_field = model_field
         # The `max_length` option is supported by Django's base `Field` class,
         # so we'd better support it here.
-        max_length = kwargs.pop('max_length', None)
+        self.max_length = kwargs.pop('max_length', None)
         super().__init__(**kwargs)
-        if max_length is not None:
+        if self.max_length is not None:
             message = lazy_format(self.error_messages['max_length'], max_length=self.max_length)
             self.validators.append(
                 MaxLengthValidator(self.max_length, message=message))


Test patch:
diff --git a/tests/test_fields.py b/tests/test_fields.py
--- a/tests/test_fields.py
+++ b/tests/test_fields.py
@@ -2204,8 +2204,8 @@ class TestBinaryJSONField(FieldValues):
     field = serializers.JSONField(binary=True)
 
 
-# Tests for FieldField.
-# ---------------------
+# Tests for FileField.
+# --------------------
 
 class MockRequest:
     def build_absolute_uri(self, value):
@@ -2247,6 +2247,21 @@ class ExampleSerializer(serializers.Serializer):
         assert field.method_name == 'get_example_field'
 
 
+# Tests for ModelField.
+# ---------------------
+
+class TestModelField:
+    def test_max_length_init(self):
+        field = serializers.ModelField(None)
+        assert len(field.validators) == 0
+
+        field = serializers.ModelField(None, max_length=10)
+        assert len(field.validators) == 1
+
+
+# Tests for validation errors
+# ---------------------------
+
 class TestValidationErrorCode:
     @pytest.mark.parametrize('use_list', (False, True))
     def test_validationerror_code_with_msg(self, use_list):
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
TextField model with choices set should default to a select box
## Steps to reproduce

Create a models.TextField with a choices parameter and visit its representation through the browsable API

## Expected behavior

Show a select box

## Actual behavior

Shows a text area


Discussion:

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/utils/field_mapping.py b/rest_framework/utils/field_mapping.py
--- a/rest_framework/utils/field_mapping.py
+++ b/rest_framework/utils/field_mapping.py
@@ -91,7 +91,8 @@ def get_field_kwargs(field_name, model_field):
     if isinstance(model_field, models.SlugField):
         kwargs['allow_unicode'] = model_field.allow_unicode
 
-    if isinstance(model_field, models.TextField) or (postgres_fields and isinstance(model_field, postgres_fields.JSONField)):
+    if isinstance(model_field, models.TextField) and not model_field.choices or \
+            (postgres_fields and isinstance(model_field, postgres_fields.JSONField)):
         kwargs['style'] = {'base_template': 'textarea.html'}
 
     if isinstance(model_field, models.AutoField) or not model_field.editable:


Test patch:
diff --git a/tests/test_model_serializer.py b/tests/test_model_serializer.py
--- a/tests/test_model_serializer.py
+++ b/tests/test_model_serializer.py
@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ class FieldOptionsModel(models.Model):
     default_field = models.IntegerField(default=0)
     descriptive_field = models.IntegerField(help_text='Some help text', verbose_name='A label')
     choices_field = models.CharField(max_length=100, choices=COLOR_CHOICES)
+    text_choices_field = models.TextField(choices=COLOR_CHOICES)
 
 
 class ChoicesModel(models.Model):
@@ -211,6 +212,7 @@ class Meta:
                 default_field = IntegerField(required=False)
                 descriptive_field = IntegerField(help_text='Some help text', label='A label')
                 choices_field = ChoiceField(choices=(('red', 'Red'), ('blue', 'Blue'), ('green', 'Green')))
+                text_choices_field = ChoiceField(choices=(('red', 'Red'), ('blue', 'Blue'), ('green', 'Green')))
         """)
         self.assertEqual(repr(TestSerializer()), expected)
Repository: encode/django-rest-framework

Issue:
RemoteUserAuthentication.authenticate calls django.contrib.auth.authenticate without request argument
## Checklist

- [X] I have verified that that issue exists against the `master` branch of Django REST framework.
- [X] I have searched for similar issues in both open and closed tickets and cannot find a duplicate.
- [X] This is not a usage question. (Those should be directed to the [discussion group](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/django-rest-framework) instead.)
- [X] This cannot be dealt with as a third party library. (We prefer new functionality to be [in the form of third party libraries](https://www.django-rest-framework.org/community/third-party-packages/#about-third-party-packages) where possible.)
- [X] I have reduced the issue to the simplest possible case.
- [x] I have included a failing test as a pull request. (If you are unable to do so we can still accept the issue.)


## Expected behavior
`user = authenticate(request=request, remote_user=request.META.get(self.header))`

## Actual behavior
`user = authenticate(remote_user=request.META.get(self.header))`



Discussion:
Feel free to open a PR about that. It looks like wee didn't notice that one when moving to Django 1.11

Resolving patch:
diff --git a/rest_framework/authentication.py b/rest_framework/authentication.py
--- a/rest_framework/authentication.py
+++ b/rest_framework/authentication.py
@@ -220,6 +220,6 @@ class RemoteUserAuthentication(BaseAuthentication):
     header = "REMOTE_USER"
 
     def authenticate(self, request):
-        user = authenticate(remote_user=request.META.get(self.header))
+        user = authenticate(request=request, remote_user=request.META.get(self.header))
         if user and user.is_active:
             return (user, None)


Test patch: