Can I get some feedback on this PR?

Thanks for the feedback. I could make some changes to the PR, but I think it's better if I get a better sense of how you'd prefer the reset to work.

I think this feature is useful, but I'd like to understand what you have in mind so I see if it is something I can work on.

My issue with the approach lies in the fact that users will not try that first. They'll first try what andradei tried:

myQuery := models.Things(qm.Where("name=?", someName))

// Use myQuery once, it works.
exists, err := myQuery.Exists(
    context.Background(), db)
    if err != nil {
        return fmt.Errorf("error looking for thing: %w", err)
    }

// Use myQuery again, doesn't work.
thing, err := myQuery.One(context.Background(), db)
if err != nil {
    return fmt.Errorf("error getting existing Thing: %w", err)
}

And only after they encounter errors/problems will they seek a resolution and finally find the resetter and learn how that works and use it.

Perhaps that's better than "they encounter errors/problems and seek a solution only to find one doesn't exist" but does there exist a design where we could simply have the obvious thing work without any additional syntax?

Basically what I'd like to happen (whether or not it's possible is another question) is for andadei's example to function as he expected it would.

I haven't been in the code in-depth for a very long time so I actually do not know if that's possible or what we would have to give up in order to have it (for example query caching inside the query object maybe) so that investigation would have to be done before we could make a decision.

Okay. I'll do some research on this later, and see if I can think of a clean way to implement this.