Re: incorrect check email with 'email_re' in 'django.core.validators'

2011-12-19 Thread Wim Lewis
On 19 Dec 2011, at 4:50 PM, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: > Strictly speaking that regex cannot determine that an email address is > well-formed per the RFC as the grammar defining the form of email addresses > is a Type 2 Chomsky Grammar and regular expressions are limited to Type 3 > Chomsky Grammar

Re: ILIKE vs. LIKE LOWER() for PostgreSQL

2011-10-04 Thread Wim Lewis
On 4 Oct 2011, at 9:19 AM, Jonas H. wrote: > On 10/04/2011 05:51 PM, Ted Gruenloh wrote: >> The django online documentation mentions that the SQL equivalent for >> __icontains is something like: >> >> SELECT ... WHERE headline ILIKE '%Lennon%'; >> However, for postgresql - one of the dbs th

Re: Meta-Proposal: Write *above* quotations in mailing list replies

2013-06-04 Thread Wim Lewis
On 4 Jun 2013, at 12:00 PM, Daniele Procida wrote: > * quote what needs to be quoted for context > * don't quote anything that doesn't need to be quoted This is, I think, the most useful/important point. There's no need to include a whole string of previous messages in later ones; this isn't 198

Re: Support Negative Indexing on QuerySets

2013-07-30 Thread Wim Lewis
On 30 Jul 2013, at 2:06 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote: > How do you think such support would look like? For negative indices you'd > have to know the size of the resultset to be able to do "limit somthing > offset length-your_negative_index" -- this doesn't seem to make any sense for > an ORM. Yo

Re: Security Advisory: BREACH and Django

2013-08-06 Thread Wim Lewis
On 6 Aug 2013, at 12:34 PM, Tim Chase wrote: > On 2013-08-06 12:53, Donald Stufft wrote: >> This incurs the cost that every request to Django invalidates all >> existing CSRF tokens [] OR requires you to store a separate CSRF token >> for each >> request and look up the submitted CSRF token in

Re: BCrypt and PBKDF2 Password Hash Caching

2013-11-19 Thread Wim Lewis
On 19 Nov 2013, at 6:10 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote: > but still you get only SHA1-level strength, when the whole idea was to > switch to stronger crypto. if in your case SHA1 is enough, you can > simply keep using it. if it's not enough, then you shouldn't be using > it. Well, it seems to

Re: The 'rule' (five-for-one)

2014-06-30 Thread Wim Lewis
On 30 Jun 2014, at 12:01 PM, Andy Baker wrote: > I was about to start a discussion about a patch I'd like to contribute when I > remembered there is a rule about contributions. > > Is it the '5 for 1' rule? Something like that - the regulars here will know > immediately what it is I'm trying to