Russ & Carl,
I'm interested in this one, so I sketched up a potential avenue tonight
(https://github.com/toastdriven/django/compare/check_setup). I actually
implemented Russ' setup first, but ran into a couple issues, so I pared it
down into an "opt-in" scheme. If there's a feeling like th
Jannis,
"You have my sword." I want to see this happen & would love to be a
part of it. A couple questions:
* How should patches be provided? Trac? BitBucket?
* Where should feedback go? This mailing list? Somewhere else?
* This is further off, but once we have a ported Django, how do get
the
Jannis,
I wasn't trying to suggest we leave anyone behind, far from it. I
was suggesting move the code to Python 3 now, while there's less code
there (than some future date) but using 3to2[1] to help others on
Python 2.X. Since Django still supports 2.5, it's possible that this
isn't even an o
Help to cite appropriately. [1] was http://pypi.python.org/pypi/3to2.
On Sep 14, 10:55 am, Daniel Lindsley wrote:
> Jannis,
>
> I wasn't trying to suggest we leave anyone behind, far from it. I
> was suggesting move the code to Python 3 now, while there's less code
>
Malcolm,
Given new information, I stand corrected. Given what I had seen in
experimenting and certain bits of Django, I was under the impression
that all models were deterministically loaded when Django started up.
Since that is not the case, it's very clear why this signal would have
implica
Russ,
Apologies for forcing the issue & for making a mess of the
``django.core`` namespace. The goal was to help improve the user experience
of sanity-checking their kit, but it seems I did more harm than good.
I'm fine with unifying the two (with option #2 probably being more
likely
Aymeric,
As with the others, I'd like to echo my thanks! Having spent a lot of
time with the old AppCache, I think these are solid improvements. Just a
couple thoughts/questions from me.
On Problem #1, IMO, I'd prefer to see something akin to an
``AppConfig.setup`` (before anything i
