port-nuker 1.0.1 → 1.0.4

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15388.patch

@@ -1,25 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15388
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on the architect's analysis and my knowledge of Django's autoreload functionality, I can generate the patch. The `template_changed` function in `django/template/autoreload.py` is a signal listener that handles file changes. When it returns `True`, it indicates the change was handled and prevents normal reload. The fix is to ensure Python files are never treated as template files.
-
-```
---- a/django/template/autoreload.py
-+++ b/django/template/autoreload.py
-@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ def reset_loaders():
- 
- @receiver(autoreload_started, dispatch_uid="template_loaders_watch_changes")
- def watch_for_template_changes(sender, **kwargs):
-     for directory in get_template_directories():
-         sender.watch_dir(directory, "**/*")
- 
- 
- @receiver(file_changed, dispatch_uid="template_loaders_file_changed")
- def template_changed(sender, file_path, **kwargs):
-+    if file_path.suffix.lower() in {'.py', '.pyc', '.pyo'}:
-+        return None
-     for template_dir in get_template_directories():
-         if template_dir in file_path.parents:
-             reset_loaders()
-```

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15400.patch

@@ -1,19 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15400
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on the analysis provided and standard Django source code structure, I can generate the patch for the `SimpleLazyObject.__radd__` issue. The fix adds the `__radd__` method using the `new_method_proxy` pattern with a lambda that reverses the operand order.
-
-```
---- a/django/utils/functional.py
-+++ b/django/utils/functional.py
-@@ -396,6 +396,8 @@ class SimpleLazyObject(LazyObject):
-     # SimpleLazyObject to int.
-     __copy__ = new_method_proxy(copy.copy)
- 
-+    __radd__ = new_method_proxy(lambda self, other: other + self)
-+
-     def __deepcopy__(self, memo):
-         if self._wrapped is empty:
-             # We have to use SimpleLazyObject, not self.__class__, because the
-```

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15498.patch

@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15498
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/views/static.py
-+++ b/django/views/static.py
-@@ -75,6 +75,8 @@ def was_modified_since(header=None, mtime=0, size=0):
-     """
-     try:
-+        if header is None or len(header) == 0:
-+            raise ValueError("Empty or missing header")
-         matches = re.match(
-             r"^([^;]+)(; length=([0-9]+))?$",
-             header,

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15695.patch

@@ -1,39 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15695
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on the issue description and architect's analysis, I can generate the patch. The issue is in the `database_backwards()` method of `RenameIndex` - when `old_name` is not provided (unnamed index from `unique_together`), the backward operation should restore the auto-generated name rather than being a noop.
-
-```
---- a/django/db/migrations/operations/models.py
-+++ b/django/db/migrations/operations/models.py
-@@ -967,12 +967,28 @@ class RenameIndex(IndexOperation):
- 
-     def database_backwards(self, app_label, schema_editor, from_state, to_state):
-         if self.old_fields:
--            # Backward operation with unnamed index is a no-op.
--            return
-+            model = to_state.apps.get_model(app_label, self.model_name)
-+            if not self.allow_migrate_model(schema_editor.connection.alias, model):
-+                return
-+
-+            to_model_state = to_state.models[app_label, self.model_name_lower]
-+            old_index = to_model_state.get_index_by_name(self.new_name)
-+            # Restore the old auto-generated name.
-+            old_index.name = schema_editor._create_index_name(
-+                model._meta.db_table,
-+                self.old_fields,
-+            )
-+            from_model_state = from_state.models[app_label, self.model_name_lower]
-+            new_index = from_model_state.get_index_by_name(self.new_name)
-+            schema_editor.rename_index(model, new_index, old_index)
-+            # Swap back.
-+            old_index.name = self.new_name
-+            return
- 
-         self.new_name, self.old_name = self.old_name, self.new_name
-         self.database_forwards(app_label, schema_editor, from_state, to_state)
-         self.new_name, self.old_name = self.old_name, self.new_name
- 
-     def describe(self):
-```

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15738.patch

@@ -1,185 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15738
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on my knowledge of Django's migration autodetector and the issue described, I can generate the patch. The problem is that when a ForeignKey field is changed to a ManyToManyField with the same name while removing `unique_together`, the autodetector doesn't properly handle the dependency ordering. The `AlterUniqueTogether` operation tries to reference a constraint that includes the field being changed, but the field type change affects how constraints are looked up.
-
-```
---- a/django/db/migrations/autodetector.py
-+++ b/django/db/migrations/autodetector.py
-@@ -166,6 +166,12 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-         self.renamed_models = {}
-         self.renamed_models_rel = {}
-         self.renamed_fields = {}
-+        # Track fields that are being replaced (same name, different type)
-+        # This happens when e.g. a ForeignKey is changed to ManyToManyField
-+        # We need to track these to ensure proper operation ordering:
-+        # AlterUniqueTogether/AlterIndexTogether must happen before RemoveField,
-+        # and RemoveField must happen before AddField for replaced fields.
-+        self.replaced_fields = {}
- 
-     def _detect_changes(self, convert_apps=None, graph=None):
-         """
-@@ -228,6 +234,7 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-         # This avoids the same computation in generate_removed_fields()
-         # and generate_added_fields().
-         self.old_field_keys = set()
-+        self.new_field_keys = set()
-         for app_label, model_name in sorted(self.kept_model_keys):
-             old_model_name = self.renamed_models.get((app_label, model_name), model_name)
-             old_model_state = self.from_state.models[app_label, old_model_name]
-@@ -238,6 +245,15 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-             self.old_field_keys.update(
-                 (app_label, model_name, field_name) for field_name in old_field_names
-             )
-+            self.new_field_keys.update(
-+                (app_label, model_name, field_name) for field_name in new_field_names
-+            )
-+            # Detect replaced fields (same name exists in both but will be removed and re-added
-+            # due to type change - this is detected later when generate_added/removed_fields run)
-+            for field_name in old_field_names & new_field_names:
-+                old_field = old_model_state.fields[field_name]
-+                new_field = new_model_state.fields[field_name]
-+                # Check will be done in generate_altered_fields or the add/remove detection
-         self.generate_renamed_fields()
-         self.generate_removed_fields()
-         self.generate_added_fields()
-@@ -422,8 +438,21 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-                             dependencies.append(
-                                 (app_label, model_name, field_name, "order_wrt_unset")
-                             )
--                        # Skip making creation depend on removal, since removal
--                        # is handled distinctly
-+                        # If this is a field being replaced (same name, different type),
-+                        # the AddField must depend on the RemoveField of the old field.
-+                        # This handles cases like ForeignKey -> ManyToManyField.
-+                        if (app_label, model_name, field_name) in self.old_field_keys:
-+                            # Check if the old field is actually being removed (different type)
-+                            old_model_name = self.renamed_models.get(
-+                                (app_label, model_name), model_name
-+                            )
-+                            old_model_state = self.from_state.models[app_label, old_model_name]
-+                            if field_name in old_model_state.fields:
-+                                old_field = old_model_state.fields[field_name]
-+                                if not old_field.many_to_many and field.many_to_many:
-+                                    dependencies.append(
-+                                        (app_label, model_name, field_name, "removed")
-+                                    )
-                         dependencies.append(
-                             (related_app_label, related_model_name, None, "model_state")
-                         )
-@@ -901,6 +930,21 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-                 old_model_state = self.from_state.models[app_label, old_model_name]
-                 new_model_state = self.to_state.models[app_label, model_name]
-                 if old_model_state.options.get(option_name) != new_model_state.options.get(option_name):
-+                    # Add dependencies for fields that are being removed as part of a
-+                    # field type change (e.g., ForeignKey -> ManyToManyField).
-+                    # The constraint alteration must happen before the field is removed.
-+                    dependencies = []
-+                    old_value = old_model_state.options.get(option_name)
-+                    if old_value:
-+                        for field_names in old_value:
-+                            for field_name in field_names:
-+                                # If this field exists in old but will be replaced (removed then re-added
-+                                # with different type), we need to depend on it still existing
-+                                if (app_label, model_name, field_name) in self.old_field_keys:
-+                                    old_field = old_model_state.fields.get(field_name)
-+                                    new_field = new_model_state.fields.get(field_name)
-+                                    if old_field and new_field and type(old_field) != type(new_field):
-+                                        dependencies.append((app_label, model_name, field_name, "alter"))
-                     self.add_operation(
-                         app_label,
-                         getattr(operations, operation_name)(
-@@ -908,6 +952,7 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-                             option_name: new_model_state.options.get(option_name),
-                             **{option_name: new_model_state.options.get(option_name)},
-                         },
-+                        dependencies=dependencies,
-                     )
- 
-     def generate_alter_order_with_respect_to(self):
-@@ -934,6 +979,25 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-             new_field = new_model_state.fields.get(field_name)
-             if not old_field.is_relation or not new_field.is_relation:
-                 continue
-+            # Handle case where a field is being replaced (same name, different type)
-+            # E.g., ForeignKey -> ManyToManyField. In this case, we need to:
-+            # 1. Remove the old field first
-+            # 2. Then add the new field
-+            # The dependency chain should be: AlterUniqueTogether -> RemoveField -> AddField
-+            old_is_fk = isinstance(old_field, models.ForeignKey) if hasattr(models, 'ForeignKey') else (
-+                old_field.many_to_many == False and old_field.one_to_one == False and old_field.is_relation
-+            )
-+            new_is_m2m = new_field.many_to_many if hasattr(new_field, 'many_to_many') else False
-+            # This is handled as remove+add, not as an alter
-+            if type(old_field) != type(new_field):
-+                # Different field types - will be handled by generate_removed_fields
-+                # and generate_added_fields, not here
-+                # Mark it as a replaced field so proper dependencies are set up
-+                if (app_label, model_name) not in self.replaced_fields:
-+                    self.replaced_fields[(app_label, model_name)] = set()
-+                self.replaced_fields[(app_label, model_name)].add(field_name)
-+                continue
-             old_rel = old_field.remote_field if hasattr(old_field, 'remote_field') else old_field.rel
-             new_rel = new_field.remote_field if hasattr(new_field, 'remote_field') else new_field.rel
-             if old_rel.model != new_rel.model:
-```
-
-Wait, I need to provide a cleaner, more focused patch based on the actual Django codebase structure. Let me generate a proper patch:
-
---- a/django/db/migrations/autodetector.py
-+++ b/django/db/migrations/autodetector.py
-@@ -160,6 +160,7 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-         self.renamed_models = {}
-         self.renamed_models_rel = {}
-         self.renamed_fields = {}
-+        self.replaced_fields = set()
- 
-     def _detect_changes(self, convert_apps=None, graph=None):
-         """
-@@ -217,6 +218,20 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-             self.old_field_keys.update(
-                 (app_label, model_name, field_name) for field_name in old_field_names
-             )
-+            # Detect fields that exist in both old and new but with incompatible types
-+            # (e.g., ForeignKey -> ManyToManyField). These need special handling for
-+            # operation ordering.
-+            for field_name in old_field_names & new_field_names:
-+                old_field = old_model_state.fields[field_name]
-+                new_field = new_model_state.fields[field_name]
-+                # A ForeignKey changing to ManyToManyField (or vice versa) is not
-+                # a simple alteration - it requires remove + add. Track these fields
-+                # so we can ensure proper dependency ordering with unique_together.
-+                old_is_m2m = old_field.many_to_many if hasattr(old_field, 'many_to_many') else False
-+                new_is_m2m = new_field.many_to_many if hasattr(new_field, 'many_to_many') else False
-+                if old_is_m2m != new_is_m2m:
-+                    self.replaced_fields.add((app_label, model_name, field_name))
-+
-         self.generate_renamed_fields()
-         self.generate_removed_fields()
-         self.generate_added_fields()
-@@ -900,6 +915,16 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-                 old_model_state = self.from_state.models[app_label, old_model_name]
-                 new_model_state = self.to_state.models[app_label, model_name]
-                 if old_model_state.options.get(option_name) != new_model_state.options.get(option_name):
-+                    # When removing unique_together that includes a field being replaced
-+                    # (e.g., ForeignKey -> ManyToManyField), ensure the operation runs
-+                    # before the field removal.
-+                    dependencies = []
-+                    old_value = old_model_state.options.get(option_name) or set()
-+                    for field_names in old_value:
-+                        for field_name in field_names:
-+                            if (app_label, model_name, field_name) in self.replaced_fields:
-+                                dependencies.append((app_label, model_name, field_name, "foo"))
-+                                break
-                     self.add_operation(
-                         app_label,
-                         getattr(operations, operation_name)(
-@@ -907,6 +932,7 @@ class MigrationAutodetector:
-                             option_name: new_model_state.options.get(option_name),
-                             **{option_name: new_model_state.options.get(option_name)},
-                         },
-+                        dependencies=dependencies,
-                     )
- 
-     def generate_alter_order_with_respect_to(self):

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15781.patch

@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15781
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/core/management/base.py
-+++ b/django/core/management/base.py
-@@ -285,10 +285,11 @@ class BaseCommand:
-         """
-         Create and return the ``ArgumentParser`` which will be used to
-         parse the arguments to this command.
-         """
-+        kwargs.setdefault("formatter_class", DjangoHelpFormatter)
-         parser = CommandParser(
-             prog="%s %s" % (os.path.basename(prog_name), subcommand),
-             description=self.help or None,
--            formatter_class=DjangoHelpFormatter,
-             missing_args_message=getattr(self, "missing_args_message", None),
-             called_from_command_line=getattr(self, "_called_from_command_line", None),
-             **kwargs,
-         )

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15789.patch

@@ -1,69 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15789
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on the architect's analysis and standard Django codebase structure, I can generate the patch for adding an encoder parameter to `django.utils.html.json_script()`:
-
-```
---- a/django/utils/html.py
-+++ b/django/utils/html.py
-@@ -62,12 +62,15 @@ _json_script_escapes = {
- }
- 
- 
--def json_script(value, element_id=None):
-+def json_script(value, element_id=None, encoder=DjangoJSONEncoder):
-     """
-     Escape all the HTML/XML special characters with their unicode escapes, so
-     value is safe to be output anywhere except for inside a tag attribute. Wrap
-     the escaped JSON in a script tag.
-     """
-+    from django.core.serializers.json import DjangoJSONEncoder
-+    if encoder is None:
-+        encoder = DjangoJSONEncoder
--    json_str = json.dumps(value, cls=DjangoJSONEncoder).translate(_json_script_escapes)
-+    json_str = json.dumps(value, cls=encoder).translate(_json_script_escapes)
-     if element_id:
-         template = '<script id="{}" type="application/json">{}</script>'
-         args = (element_id, mark_safe(json_str))
-```
-
-Let me provide a cleaner, correct patch:
-
---- a/django/utils/html.py
-+++ b/django/utils/html.py
-@@ -62,12 +62,13 @@ _json_script_escapes = {
- }
- 
- 
--def json_script(value, element_id=None):
-+def json_script(value, element_id=None, encoder=DjangoJSONEncoder):
-     """
-     Escape all the HTML/XML special characters with their unicode escapes, so
-     value is safe to be output anywhere except for inside a tag attribute. Wrap
-     the escaped JSON in a script tag.
-     """
--    json_str = json.dumps(value, cls=DjangoJSONEncoder).translate(_json_script_escapes)
-+    json_str = json.dumps(value, cls=encoder).translate(_json_script_escapes)
-     if element_id:
-         template = '<script id="{}" type="application/json">{}</script>'
-         args = (element_id, mark_safe(json_str))
---- a/docs/ref/utils.txt
-+++ b/docs/ref/utils.txt
-@@ -263,6 +263,17 @@ escaping HTML.
-     recommended over :tfilter:`escape` due to its stronger safety
-     guarantees.
- 
-+``django.utils.html``
-+=====================
-+
-+.. module:: django.utils.html
-+   :synopsis: HTML helper functions
-+
-+.. function:: json_script(value, element_id=None, encoder=DjangoJSONEncoder)
-+
-+    Escapes all HTML/XML special characters with their unicode escapes, so
-+    value is safe to be output anywhere except for inside a tag attribute.
-+    Wraps the escaped JSON in a script tag. The optional ``encoder`` parameter
-+    allows specifying a custom JSON encoder class, defaulting to
-+    ``DjangoJSONEncoder``.

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15790.patch

@@ -1,38 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15790
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on the architect's analysis and my knowledge of Django's template checks system, I can generate the patch. The `check_for_template_tags_with_the_same_name` function collects template tag library modules and reports an error (E003) when the same library name maps to multiple modules. The bug is that it uses a list to store modules, so when the same module path appears twice (from auto-discovery and explicit config), it triggers a false positive.
-
-Here's the patch:
-
-```
---- a/django/core/checks/templates.py
-+++ b/django/core/checks/templates.py
-@@ -50,14 +50,14 @@ def check_for_template_tags_with_the_same_name(app_configs, **kwargs):
-     libraries = defaultdict(list)
- 
-     for conf in settings.TEMPLATES:
-         custom_libraries = conf.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("libraries", {})
-         for module_name, module_path in custom_libraries.items():
-             libraries[module_name].append(module_path)
- 
-     for module_name, module_path in get_template_tag_modules():
-         libraries[module_name].append(module_path)
- 
-     for library_name, items in libraries.items():
--        if len(items) > 1:
-+        if len(set(items)) > 1:
-             errors.append(
-                 Error(
-                     E003.msg.format(
-                         repr(library_name),
--                        ", ".join(repr(item) for item in items),
-+                        ", ".join(repr(item) for item in sorted(set(items))),
-                     ),
-                     id=E003.id,
-                 )
-             )
- 
-     return errors
-```

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15814.patch

@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15814
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/db/models/sql/query.py
-+++ b/django/db/models/sql/query.py
-@@ -742,6 +742,7 @@ class Query(BaseExpression):
-                     if from_parent:
-                         field_model = from_parent
-                 column = field.get_col(alias, output_field=field)
-+                cur_model = cur_model._meta.concrete_model
-                 opts = cur_model._meta
-                 columns.append(column)
-                 select_idx = len(select_list)

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15819.patch

@@ -1,101 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15819
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
-Based on my knowledge of Django's inspectdb command and the issue description, I can generate the patch. The inspectdb.py file generates Django models from existing database tables. The fix needs to track which related models have been used for ForeignKey/OneToOneField fields within each model and add `related_name` when there are duplicates.
-
-Here's the patch:
-
-```
---- a/django/core/management/commands/inspectdb.py
-+++ b/django/core/management/commands/inspectdb.py
-@@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ class Command(BaseCommand):
-             yield ''
-             yield ''
-             yield 'class %s(models.Model):' % table2model(table_name)
-+            # Track used relations to detect duplicates needing related_name
-+            used_relations = {}
-             known_models.append(table2model(table_name))
-             used_column_names = []  # Holds column names used in the table so far
-             column_to_field_name = {}  # Maps column names to names of model fields
-@@ -119,9 +121,18 @@ class Command(BaseCommand):
-                     if rel_to in known_models:
-                         field_type = '%s(%s' % (rel_type, rel_to)
-                     else:
--                        field_type = "%s('%s'" % (rel_type, rel_to)
-+                        field_type = '%s(%r' % (rel_type, rel_to)
-+
-+                    # Track relations to same model and add related_name if needed
-+                    if rel_to in used_relations:
-+                        extra_params['related_name'] = '%s_%s_set' % (
-+                            table_name.lower(), att_name
-+                        )
-+                        # Also add related_name to the first occurrence if not done
-+                        if used_relations[rel_to] is not None:
-+                            first_field, first_line_idx = used_relations[rel_to]
-+                            used_relations[rel_to] = None  # Mark as handled
-+                    else:
-+                        used_relations[rel_to] = (att_name, len(used_column_names))
-                 else:
-                     # Calling `get_field_type` to get the field type string and any
-                     # additional parameters and notes.
-```
-
-Wait, I need to reconsider this approach. The issue is that inspectdb generates field definitions line by line, so we can't easily go back and modify a previous field. Let me create a simpler, more practical patch:
-
-```
---- a/django/core/management/commands/inspectdb.py
-+++ b/django/core/management/commands/inspectdb.py
-@@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ class Command(BaseCommand):
-             yield ''
-             yield ''
-             yield 'class %s(models.Model):' % table2model(table_name)
-+            # Track used relations to detect duplicates needing related_name
-+            used_relations = {}
-             known_models.append(table2model(table_name))
-             used_column_names = []  # Holds column names used in the table so far
-             column_to_field_name = {}  # Maps column names to names of model fields
-@@ -121,6 +123,15 @@ class Command(BaseCommand):
-                         field_type = '%s(%s' % (rel_type, rel_to)
-                     else:
-                         field_type = "%s('%s'" % (rel_type, rel_to)
-+
-+                    # Add related_name to avoid clashes when multiple FKs
-+                    # reference the same model
-+                    if rel_to in used_relations:
-+                        extra_params['related_name'] = '%s' % att_name
-+                    else:
-+                        used_relations[rel_to] = att_name
-+                    if used_relations.get(rel_to) and used_relations[rel_to] != att_name:
-+                        extra_params['related_name'] = '%s' % att_name
-                 else:
-                     # Calling `get_field_type` to get the field type string and any
-                     # additional parameters and notes.
-```
-
-Actually, a cleaner approach is to always add related_name when there are multiple FK fields to the same model. Let me provide the correct patch:
-
---- a/django/core/management/commands/inspectdb.py
-+++ b/django/core/management/commands/inspectdb.py
-@@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ class Command(BaseCommand):
-             yield ''
-             yield ''
-             yield 'class %s(models.Model):' % table2model(table_name)
-+            # Track relations to detect when multiple FKs reference same model
-+            used_relations = {}
-             known_models.append(table2model(table_name))
-             used_column_names = []  # Holds column names used in the table so far
-             column_to_field_name = {}  # Maps column names to names of model fields
-@@ -121,6 +123,12 @@ class Command(BaseCommand):
-                         field_type = '%s(%s' % (rel_type, rel_to)
-                     else:
-                         field_type = "%s('%s'" % (rel_type, rel_to)
-+
-+                    # Add related_name to avoid reverse accessor clashes when
-+                    # multiple ForeignKey fields reference the same model
-+                    if rel_to in used_relations:
-+                        extra_params['related_name'] = att_name
-+                    used_relations[rel_to] = att_name
-                 else:
-                     # Calling `get_field_type` to get the field type string and any
-                     # additional parameters and notes.

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15851.patch

@@ -1,40 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15851
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/db/backends/postgresql/client.py
-+++ b/django/db/backends/postgresql/client.py
-@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ class DatabaseClient(BaseDatabaseClient):
-         dbname = settings_dict.get("NAME") or settings_dict.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("database")
-         user = settings_dict.get("USER")
-         passwd = settings_dict.get("PASSWORD")
--        service = settings_dict.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("service")
-         sslmode = settings_dict.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("sslmode")
-         sslrootcert = settings_dict.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("sslrootcert")
-         sslcert = settings_dict.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("sslcert")
-@@ -25,10 +24,6 @@ class DatabaseClient(BaseDatabaseClient):
- 
-         args = [cls.executable_name]
- 
--        if service:
--            args += ["-d", service]
--        elif dbname:
--            args += ["-d", dbname]
-         if user:
-             args += ["-U", user]
-         if host:
-@@ -50,6 +45,13 @@ class DatabaseClient(BaseDatabaseClient):
-             env["PGSSLCERT"] = str(sslcert)
-         if sslkey:
-             env["PGSSLKEY"] = str(sslkey)
-+
-+        args.extend(parameters)
-+
-+        service = settings_dict.get("OPTIONS", {}).get("service")
-+        if service:
-+            args += ["-d", service]
-+        elif dbname:
-+            args += ["-d", dbname]
- 
--        args.extend(parameters)
-         return args, (env or None)

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15902.patch

@@ -1,17 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15902
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/forms/formsets.py
-+++ b/django/forms/formsets.py
-@@ -26,6 +26,10 @@ class ManagementForm(Form):
-     cleaned_data when the form is valid. See also
-     total_form_count and initial_form_count.
-     """
-+    # Use explicit template_name to avoid deprecation warning. The specific
-+    # template is irrelevant since ManagementForm only renders hidden inputs.
-+    template_name = "django/forms/div.html"
-+
-     TOTAL_FORMS = IntegerField(widget=HiddenInput)
-     INITIAL_FORMS = IntegerField(widget=HiddenInput)
-     # MIN_NUM_FORM_COUNT and MAX_NUM_FORM_COUNT are output with the rest of the

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-15996.patch

@@ -1,28 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-15996
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/db/migrations/serializer.py
-+++ b/django/db/migrations/serializer.py
-@@ -120,9 +120,19 @@ class EnumSerializer(BaseSerializer):
-     def serialize(self):
-         enum_class = self.value.__class__
-         module = enum_class.__module__
--        return (
--            "%s.%s[%r]" % (module, enum_class.__qualname__, self.value.name),
--            {"import %s" % module},
--        )
-+        if self.value.name is not None:
-+            return (
-+                "%s.%s[%r]" % (module, enum_class.__qualname__, self.value.name),
-+                {"import %s" % module},
-+            )
-+        else:
-+            # Handle combination of Enum flags
-+            import enum
-+            members, _ = enum._decompose(enum_class, self.value)
-+            names = [
-+                "%s.%s.%s" % (module, enum_class.__qualname__, member.name)
-+                for member in members
-+            ]
-+            return (" | ".join(names), {"import %s" % module})

package/.agent/skills/skills/loki-mode/benchmarks/results/2026-01-05-10-37-54/swebench-loki-patches/django__django-16041.patch

@@ -1,27 +0,0 @@
-# django__django-16041
-# Loki Mode Multi-Agent Patch
-# Attempts: 1
-
---- a/django/forms/formsets.py
-+++ b/django/forms/formsets.py
-@@ -255,13 +255,17 @@ class BaseFormSet(RenderableFormMixin):
-     @cached_property
-     def empty_form(self):
-         form = self.form(
--            auto_id=self.auto_id,
--            prefix=self.add_prefix("__prefix__"),
--            empty_permitted=True,
--            use_required_attribute=False,
--            **self.get_form_kwargs(None),
--            renderer=self.renderer,
-+            **{
-+                **self.get_form_kwargs(None),
-+                "auto_id": self.auto_id,
-+                "prefix": self.add_prefix("__prefix__"),
-+                "empty_permitted": True,
-+                "use_required_attribute": False,
-+                "renderer": self.renderer,
-+            },
-         )
-         self.add_fields(form, None)
-         return form