I should have elaborated on my problem.
I basically need to be able to handle about a dozen languages all at
the same time. That basically means I need Unicode to work. There's
some patches in Trac that I've put up that handle all the cases that
I'm currently aware of - some of which certainly
On Aug 31, 2006, at 1:31 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> Thanks for bringing this up, Gary. The get_and_delete_messages() thing
> has always bothered me -- if it's activated, we do it for every
> request. I suppose we could make the 'messages' part of the context
> processor lazy, so that it would
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Aug 28, 2006, at 2:50 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> > On 8/28/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Are the any objections to changing the psycopg2 backend to behave the
> >> same was as the other ones (knowing that it's actually a step
> >> backwards)
Derek,
On 31/08/06, Derek Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> hey matt,
>
> would you be willing to send me a copy of your app, your original
> schema, and whatever load script failed?
>
> derek
Unfortunately I can't send you a copy of the app. However looking at
your branch it seems it may
So I should probably get started on the generic-auth and
per-object-permissions (hereafter pop) integration soon. I've had
problems trying to merge changes from the trunk into the generic-auth
branch, so I'd just assume call that branch dead. The actual
generic-auth code is just a patch to the tru
On 8/30/06, Jay Parlar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A question then: Once the SQLAlchemy stuff is in and solid, will there
> be any reason *not* to use it?
We'll decide that when we get there, but I'm inclined to answer your
question with a single word: "Simplicity." Django will continue to
work
There I go, answering the wrong question... I should learn not to post
after 10 pm, too many brain cells are asleep and the remainder can't
handle typing and thinking at the same time.
The reason not to use it I guess would be that you already have a
working app and you don't need it.
JP
--~-
Jay Parlar wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The goal is that this will have *zero* effect on existing queries. The
> > Django query syntax will remain exactly the same, and the database API
> > will stay the same. The only difference is that the SQLAlchemy backen
On 8/30/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The goal is that this will have *zero* effect on existing queries. The
> Django query syntax will remain exactly the same, and the database API
> will stay the same. The only difference is that the SQLAlchemy backend
> will have *extra* func
On 8/30/06, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What impact will this change have on existing queries?
>
> If the intention is to make the Django->SQLAlchemy model transition as easy
> as replacing an import statement, what is the transition plan for existing
> queries?
>
> Will the m
> Then when you need to get at the
> SQLAlchemy Table object, you'd do something like
> Story._sa_table.some_method().
How about `Story._meta.table` or `Story._meta.c` or .columns or
something, to avoid littering the model's namespace with more
properties?
JP
--~--~-~--~~--
Robin Munn wrote:
> On 8/30/06, JP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > This is great news!
> >
> > One question comes to mind first, because I am nothing if not
> > self-absorbed. :) I wonder how much of the multi-db branch I have been
> > working on will be made irrelevant by this. Any thoughts on
On 8/30/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all,Spawned by the recent discussion of the big picture of Python Webframeworks, we've decided to start a new branch of Django developmentthat uses SQLAlchemy (http://www.sqlalchemy.org/
) as the underlyingdatabase library.What impact will t
GinTon wrote:
> I have seen that for web applications is best far using a ODBMS:
>
> 1- Objects in an OODBMS can store an arbitrary number of atomic types
> as well as other objects. The fact that an OODBMS is better suited to
> handling complex,interrelated data than an RDBMS means that an OODBMS
On 8/31/06, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
On 8/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> The committer russelm said: Template variable evalution should follow Python norms.
As I understand it, the distinction is between the string 'False' andthe boolean False.This is correct
On 8/31/06, Karl Guertin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/30/06, GinTon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I wanted to know your opinions. Since of my view point I think that the
> > web frameworks with ODBMS will be the next big step.
>
> I prefer an RDBMS because I tend to integrate with other
>
On 8/30/06, zzzeek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Karl Guertin wrote:
> > This is probably something I should submit a patch for in ActiveMapper
> > itself, but the biggest problem with ActiveMapper is that you can't
> > get at the primaryjoin and secondaryjoin attributes to do the more
> > invo
On 8/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would agree if you take 'False' as a real string which shouldn't evaluate
> to False, but I had the following templatetag called:
>
> {% mytag "some string" False %}
>
> Which now resolved in an error:
I'm wondering why you need to p
Hi James,
James Bennett schrieb:
> On 8/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The committer russelm said: Template variable evalution should follow Python
>> norms.
>
> As I understand it, the distinction is between the string 'False' and
> the boolean False.
>
> In other words,
Op zo, 20-08-2006 te 12:14 +0300, schreef Ahmad Alhashemi:
> Note that you can do this outside of Django. I think that there is
> something like this for apache called mod_security. It works
> regardless of the scripting language/framework you are using.
I wonder if you know any *sensible* rules
On 8/30/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The committer russelm said: Template variable evalution should follow Python
> norms.
As I understand it, the distinction is between the string 'False' and
the boolean False.
In other words, if you pop open a Python shell and do this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've installed it and it's very nice. I've moved "sitemap" to contrib -
> is it ok? :) because there is one minor problem is with sitemap.xml -
> it try to load it from:
>
> Django tried loading these templates, in this order:
> Using lo
Hi all,
why was False/True evaluation in http://code.djangoproject.com/changeset/3680
reverted?
The committer russelm said: Template variable evalution should follow Python
norms.
What would be more Python norms for true and false as True and False ?
Regards,
Dirk
--
Der GMX SmartSurfer
I've installed it and it's very nice. I've moved "sitemap" to contrib -
is it ok? :) because there is one minor problem is with sitemap.xml -
it try to load it from:
Django tried loading these templates, in this order:
Using loader django.template.loaders.filesyste
On 8/30/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My only quibble is the recommendation in the docs to call``ping_google()`` from the ``save()`` method. I think the idea ofsetting off a HTTP request from within a ``save()`` method isn't sucha grand idea; network latency could cause the save
Deryck Hodge wrote:
> Hi, Dan.
>
> On 8/30/06, Dan Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Not sure if people will use it, but suggestions and feedback are always
> > welcome!
>
> I had to do a sitemap generator for a client from work recently -- my
> code is pre-mr due to older version of Django w
Karl Guertin wrote:
> This is probably something I should submit a patch for in ActiveMapper
> itself, but the biggest problem with ActiveMapper is that you can't
> get at the primaryjoin and secondaryjoin attributes to do the more
> involved mapping. As a result, I normally just do assign_mapper
On 8/30/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My only quibble is the recommendation in the docs to call
> ``ping_google()`` from the ``save()`` method. I think the idea of
> setting off a HTTP request from within a ``save()`` method isn't such
> a grand idea; network latency could ca
Hi, Dan.
On 8/30/06, Dan Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not sure if people will use it, but suggestions and feedback are always
> welcome!
I had to do a sitemap generator for a client from work recently -- my
code is pre-mr due to older version of Django we're on. One of the
problems I had
> I prefer an RDBMS because I tend to integrate with other
> projects/languages at the RDBMS level. The other advantage is that the
> RDBMS are much better tested because they're in wider use.
I second carls opinion. With RDBMS you easily create a gui app that
connects to the db used by some web
Hi Chris,
why not use the existing show_all_rows admin setting?
When logged in users with restricted permissions access the respective
admin change list page for 'Object' objects they don't get to see rows
they do not have permission to change if show_all_rows=false is set
anyway.
So if they acc
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Dan Watson wrote:
> > Just wanted to draw some attention to
> > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2628 - it's a contrib app I've
> > written to automatically generate sitemap.xml files for Google. I've
> > also written about it here:
> >
On 8/29/06, Gary Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I hit another little snag today related to this. The
> contrib.auth.middleware.LazyUser calls contrib.auth.get_user (knowing
> where to get the user from based on the backend stored in
> session['_auth_user_backend']), which will return an
>
On Aug 30, 2006, at 11:51 AM, Dan Watson wrote:
> Just wanted to draw some attention to
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2628 - it's a contrib app I've
> written to automatically generate sitemap.xml files for Google. I've
> also written about it here:
> http://theidioteque.net/blog/2006/08/
Just wanted to draw some attention to
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2628 - it's a contrib app I've
written to automatically generate sitemap.xml files for Google. I've
also written about it here:
http://theidioteque.net/blog/2006/08/29/google-sitemaps/
Not sure if people will use it, but s
hey matt,
would you be willing to send me a copy of your app, your original
schema, and whatever load script failed?
derek
Matthew Flanagan wrote:
> I had some to make some changes to some models today that would result
> in schema changes so I decided to give the schema-evolution branch a
> g
On 8/30/06, GinTon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wanted to know your opinions. Since of my view point I think that the
> web frameworks with ODBMS will be the next big step.
I prefer an RDBMS because I tend to integrate with other
projects/languages at the RDBMS level. The other advantage is tha
I've attached my patch with the ticket. After patching both of the
following work:
# return a string , as before
@register.simple_tag
def func(...):
...
return 'a string'
# return a dict, items of the dict will be set to context
@register.simple_tag
def func(...):
...
return
On 8/30/06, Robin Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Right now, I plan to use ActiveMapper -- why re-invent the wheel? I'd
> be happy to look at your code, though. I like "borrowing" from other
> people's work whenever I can, it means less work for me. :-) And
> that's what open-source development
Malcolm,
Hmm... ok I was running 3.1.3 on OSX (installed via darwinports). I've
upgraded to 3.3.7. Also upgraded pysqlite to the latest in darwinports
(2.0.5). But the tests fail for many_to_one and many_to_many whenever
.count() is used with .distinct().
Specifically:
(many_to_one:)
Reporter.o
On 8/30/06, David Elias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Robin Munn wrote:
> > The notes on implementation that Adrian posted pretty much match what
> > I'm thinking at this point. The plan is to make this 100% API
> > compatible (if possible -- you never know what will turn up once you
> > start
On 8/30/06, JP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is great news!
>
> One question comes to mind first, because I am nothing if not
> self-absorbed. :) I wonder how much of the multi-db branch I have been
> working on will be made irrelevant by this. Any thoughts on how the
> sqlalchemy backend mi
Ian Holsman wrote:
> yes..
> what exactly are you proposing here?
>
> with a OODBMS you shouldn't need any of the ORM functionality.. you
> should be able to just use the other sections without
> much worry i would suspect.
>
I wanted to know your opinions. Since of my view point I think that the
On 8/29/06, gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Robin Munn wrote:
> >
> > The notes on implementation that Adrian posted pretty much match what
> > I'm thinking at this point. The plan is to make this 100% API
> > compatible (if possible -- you never know what will turn up once you
> > start impl
yes..
what exactly are you proposing here?
with a OODBMS you shouldn't need any of the ORM functionality.. you
should be able to just use the other sections without
much worry i would suspect.
regards
Ian
On 30/08/2006, at 8:10 PM, GinTon wrote:
>
> I have seen that for web applications is be
I have seen that for web applications is best far using a ODBMS:
1- Objects in an OODBMS can store an arbitrary number of atomic types
as well as other objects. The fact that an OODBMS is better suited to
handling complex,interrelated data than an RDBMS means that an OODBMS
can outperform an RDBM
My conclusion is that for storing XML data would be usefull ut using a
ODBMS based on the ODMG 3.0 specification that incorporates advances in
object database technology (e.g., replication), data management (e.g.,
spatial indexing), and data formats (e.g., XML) and to include new
features into the
Robin Munn wrote:
> The notes on implementation that Adrian posted pretty much match what
> I'm thinking at this point. The plan is to make this 100% API
> compatible (if possible -- you never know what will turn up once you
> start implementing some idea), so that existing code doesn't need to
>
48 matches
Mail list logo
