Add notes re view-level and instance-level permissions checks. Closes #1819.

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/docs/api-guide/permissions.md b/docs/api-guide/permissions.md
index e867a456..f3ae8171 100644
--- a/docs/api-guide/permissions.md
+++ b/docs/api-guide/permissions.md
@@ -183,11 +183,7 @@ If you need to test if a request is a read operation or a write operation, you s
 
 ---
 
-**Note**: In versions 2.0 and 2.1, the signature for the permission checks always included an optional `obj` parameter, like so: `.has_permission(self, request, view, obj=None)`.  The method would be called twice, first for the global permission checks, with no object supplied, and second for the object-level check when required.
-
-As of version 2.2 this signature has now been replaced with two separate method calls, which is more explicit and obvious.  The old style signature continues to work, but its use will result in a `PendingDeprecationWarning`, which is silent by default.  In 2.3 this will be escalated to a `DeprecationWarning`, and in 2.4 the old-style signature will be removed.
-
-For more details see the [2.2 release announcement][2.2-announcement].
+**Note**: The instance-level `has_object_permission` method will only be called if the view-level `has_permission` checks have already passed. Also note that in order for the instance-level checks to run, the view code should explicitly call `.check_object_permissions(request, obj)`. If you are using the generic views then this will be handled for you by default.
 
 ---