Another Rest API relations - api

Question

ive been digging through quite a few questions on here about restful relations but havent quite found what im after.
consider this scenario
GET /api/users(?include=custom_fields) - returns an array of users, optionally including relations as nested properties
GET /api/users/1(?include=custom_fields) - returns a single user object
POST /api/users - creates a new user (if the request includes an array of "custom_fields" these are created and linked)
PUT /api/users/1 - replaces user entity with supplied payload
PATCH /api/users/1 - updates the user properties provided
DELETE /api/users/1 - deletes
GET /api/users/1/custom_fields - gets all users custom_fields
PUT /api/users/1/custom_fields - deletes all existing custom_fields and creates ones provided
PATCH /api/users/1/custom_fields - appends if not exists, or creates new custom fields for this user
DELETE /api/users/1/custom_fields - deletes all custom fields for user
DELETE /api/users/1/custom_fields/{id} - deletes custom field for use by id.
this all makes sense to me and is working as expected, however im now implementing a "user edit" screen in my admin area, this shows the user object AND the custom fields.
right now the only RESTFUL way i can see to save this form is to:
PATCH to /api/users/{id}
to save the user. when thats done,
PUT to /api/users/{id}/custom_fields
to update the custom fields.
not ideal but would work, however going forward i know for sure i will have other related resources like user roles, emails, etc.
this doesnt change the situation it just means alot more endpoints.
something about this smells to me. to simply save a user im having to make requests to at least two endpoints.
how would you suggest best to handle this without the two different requests?

Answer 1

The simplest solution would be to just include all those (custom fields, roles, etc.) into the User representation, you already seem to be doing that anyway on GET and POST. Just extend that to PUT and PATCH too.
If you already support some media-type for the PATCH method on Users, then you could conceivably extend that to define adding/removing custom fields, roles, whatever you need.