Hello!
This Malcolm's reply in a nearby thread:
> Unless you're
> using really huge querysets, the memory usage is not going to kill you.
> Pulling back the huge number of results already uses a bunch of memory
> and that's a property of the db wrapper.
... has reminded me that this behavior wa
The last unsolved model-validation design issue is the error message
protocol (my work on fields is waiting on it). Let me present the
approach that looks sane to me.
The old Field.default_error_messages dict and corresponding
logic is no longer required (and removed in my branch) as default
erro
On Feb 18, 2:28 pm, mrts wrote:
> def validate(self, value, all_values={}, form_instance=None):
That should have been
def validate(self, value, all_values={}):
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Hi folks --
By now I think it's obvious to everyone that we're behind on the 1.1 release. We
(the core devs) have talked it over, and we're going to revise the
plan for 1.1. In a nutshell:
* Model validation will be dropped for 1.1 (it'll ship in 1.2 instead).
* All other "must-haves" will be m
Hi,
see inline text.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:28 PM, mrts wrote:
>
> The last unsolved model-validation design issue is the error message
> protocol (my work on fields is waiting on it). Let me present the
> approach that looks sane to me.
>
> The old Field.default_error_messages dict and corre
> I've already talked to a few folks who want to focus
> on this at the PyCon sprints next month. It's looking like model validation
> and
> 1.1 will be like aggregation and 1.0: a feature nearly done that just needs
> another release cycle for full maturity.
It's almost becomming a tradition fo
On Feb 18, 8:03 pm, Honza Král wrote:
> Hi,
> see inline text.
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:28 PM, mrts wrote:
>
> > The last unsolved model-validation design issue is the error message
> > protocol (my work on fields is waiting on it). Let me present the
> > approach that looks sane to me.
>
>
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Honza Král wrote:
>
> > I've already talked to a few folks who want to focus
> > on this at the PyCon sprints next month. It's looking like model
> validation and
> > 1.1 will be like aggregation and 1.0: a feature nearly done that just
> needs
> > another release
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 11:20 +0300, Ivan Sagalaev wrote:
> Hello!
>
> This Malcolm's reply in a nearby thread:
>
> > Unless you're
> > using really huge querysets, the memory usage is not going to kill you.
> > Pulling back the huge number of results already uses a bunch of memory
> > and that's
On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 04:28 -0800, mrts wrote:
> The last unsolved model-validation design issue is the error message
> protocol (my work on fields is waiting on it).
Well, it's the the last issue, but it's certainly a stumbling block.
I've been spending quite a lot of time lately trying to merg
Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> So, once again, it was Jeremy stirring the pot and it's you keeping the
> issue alive a couple of years later.
Well, the issue wasn't resolved. What could I do? :-)
> I think the comments and requests for information Younger Me made in
> that thread are still valid. T
On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 18:15 -0700, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ian,
> >
> > On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 16:05 -0700, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > [...]
> >> The solution that I'm proposing is to use the extra select expression
> >> itself in the gr
12 matches
Mail list logo
