I've been messing with manipulator code in magic-removal, and it
struck me that we could avoid a lot of the boilerplate, cruft and
newbie confusion by making models validation-aware. Example:
class Poll(Model):
pub_date = DateTimeField()
question = CharField(maxlength=30)
On 1/21/06, Tom Tobin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I opened ticket [1259] as it seems that there's a mismatch in
> magic-removal between aspects of the admin interface regarding model
> names being referenced as singular or plural. I believe there was
> recent discussion on standardizing to singu
I opened ticket [1259] as it seems that there's a mismatch in
magic-removal between aspects of the admin interface regarding model
names being referenced as singular or plural. I believe there was
recent discussion on standardizing to singular model names; if someone
can confirm which way this is
On 1/21/06, hugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I am +1 on that change,
I've attached an alternate version of the patch that implements this
idea. In this version, the object instance defers to the default
manager for delete functionality.
This removes the duplication of SQL delete logic, but
Hi,I am trying to generate RSS feeds using Django, and followed the documentation, but am not able to figure out how to specify title and description for individual items. Right now Django is using the string representation of item objects. My feeds are "complex feed" as per documentation, I tried
Thanks for your reply,
that means my tag implementation is wrong :-( ...
Then, how can I resolve the variable name inside the tag
implementation??
I'd like to invoke the tag like:
{% imgpath /static/images/ %} ... and
are variables.
It looks like it can not be supported ... I hope I'm wrong.
On 1/21/06, imbunche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The custom filter and the custom tag mentioned above work fine by
> themselves, it also works if I use any standard filter like upper or
> lower but if I use:
>
> {% imgpath {{myimg | thumb}} %}
The syntax is slightly off in that example. You'll w
On 1/21/06, imbunche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the prompt response.
> I think this feature is a bit counterintuitive may be it should be
> noted in the documentation.
Good call. I've added a "Custom libraries and template inheritance"
section to the template docs:
http://www.
> This is a feature -- each template that uses custom tags or filters
> needs to load them explicitly.
>
> Adrian
Thanks a lot for the prompt response.
I think this feature is a bit counterintuitive may be it should be
noted in the documentation.
thx again.
Saludos,
IvO
Hi,
I have a tag (called imgpath) which creates the renders the tag
with the image passed as argument and verifies the file exists or
provides some defaults ... that works fine. Notice that the argument to
{%imgpath%} can be a template variable, e.g.
{% imgpath {{baseurl}}/images/{{myimage}} %}
On 1/21/06, imbunche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would have imagine that an inherited template has access to the same
> set of filters/customtags than the parent template.
>
> Is this a feature or a bug?? in any case the documentation should make
> it clear.
> Can someone clarify??. Should I su
Hi,
I notice that if I load my set of filters in my base view (base.html)
and then try to use any of those filter in any template that {% extends
%} base the filter are not available (not recognized) leading to the
error page.
I would have imagine that an inherited template has access to the sam
Hey Chris,
On 21 Jan 2006, at 15:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The default django url configuration system seems does not allow
url with "dot", i.e. I need url like "http://mysite.com/user/
favorate/web2.0", but this url con't match any url configuration
even I use following config:
(r'^us
Hi guys.
The default django url configuration system seems does not allow url
with "dot", i.e. I need url like
"http://mysite.com/user/favorate/web2.0";, but this url con't match any
url configuration even I use following config:
(r'^user/favorate/(?P.*)$', 'test.fav.index'),
Any suggestion?
>However, it would
>mean moving some model logic into the manager, making Model.delete()
>defer to the manager to collate and remove objects. Would this rub
>anyone the wrong (or right) way?
Actually I think sooner or later we will need objects to keep track of
the manager they came from - for ex
On 1/21/06, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, this means that people with MySQL 3/4 databases will need toupgrade or choose another database. But why should we spend so muchtime and effort writing, testing, and debugging a reimplementation ofreferential integrity in Django simply
Hi guys
Ok, lets try this one again.
I've attached (but not committed) a patch for bulk delete in
magic-removal (Ticket #1219).
Issues worth note:
- pre-delete/post-delete signals are sent for all deleted objects.
This could turn into a bit of a signal flood if you delete a lot of
objects, or
17 matches
Mail list logo
