Re: [GSoC] Revamping validation framework and merging django-secure once again

2013-07-17 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
Hi Chris, On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Christopher Medrela < chris.medr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Finally, I've rewritten all model and field tests and checks. Some new > tests > were written. First draft of checking framework documentation was written. > All > tests passes (at least at my compu

Re: [GSoC] Revamping validation framework and merging django-secure once again

2013-07-17 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Christopher Medrela < chris.medr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Progress: I've implemented manager checks. > > The schedule for the next 4 weeks is: > > 1. Manager checks (ref 4.1.7)(done)(0.5 week). > 2. Entry point registering (ref 4.1.5) & rewriting mechanism of trigger

Re: [GSoC] Revamping validation framework and merging django-secure once again

2013-07-17 Thread Christopher Medrela
I've created a pull request [1] to make deep review easier. I've rolled out tests we were talking about and reverted `validate_field` -- there exist both `check_field` and `validate_field`, the first calling the second. [1] https://github.com/django/django/pull/1364 -- You received this messag

Re: Hybrid Property request

2013-07-17 Thread Jonathan Slenders
This is really nice. Both have their use cases, but I'm prefering the second when possible, because it's much more flexible and preserves database consistency. With the same efford you can make the following work: ProductEntry.objects.filter(lambda p: p.onpurchase_price * p.quantity == 5000.0)

Re: Hybrid Property request

2013-07-17 Thread Jonathan Slenders
Oh, and denormalisation is not necessarily faster. If you're able to express the value of the column as an SQL expression, it's possible to put an index on such an expression. Le mercredi 17 juillet 2013 13:18:16 UTC+2, Jonathan Slenders a écrit : > > This is really nice. Both have their use ca

Re: Hybrid Property request

2013-07-17 Thread Curtis Maloney
On 17 July 2013 21:18, Jonathan Slenders wrote: > This is really nice. Both have their use cases, but I'm prefering the > second when possible, because it's much more flexible and preserves > database consistency. > With the same efford you can make the following work: > > ProductEntry.objects.fil

Re: 'LIKE' statement in Model.objects.raw() using percentage '%'

2013-07-17 Thread Jorge Cardoso Leitão
This is a mailing list for developing of django itself. For usage of django please use the django-user mailing list. Jorge On Jul 17, 2013, at 4:21 PM, spondbob squelpen wrote: > I have problem in django using query statement "LIKE %s%" with > Model.objects.raw(). I guess the problem is on '%'

'LIKE' statement in Model.objects.raw() using percentage '%'

2013-07-17 Thread spondbob squelpen
I have problem in django using query statement "LIKE %s%" with Model.objects.raw(). I guess the problem is on '%' character but i don't know where is it. Here's my model's code: def listInRange(self, placeLat, placeLng, typeId, range, placeTag): tags = '' if placeTag:

Re: Deprecate FCGI support in Django 1.7

2013-07-17 Thread Aymeric Augustin
On 15 juil. 2013, at 23:45, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > Let's start FCGI (and the others) down the path to deprecation. If there's > truly a community that finds value in these things -- and frankly I think > that once they try modern options they'll quickly switch and never look back > -- then