On Apr 19, 1:36 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Since this is actually a good idea, we should give credit where it's
> due: the whole theory behind this (and most of the details) is Simon
> Willison's creation. I just wrote the code and polished off some of the
> less smooth co
Justin Bronn wrote:
> >From GEOSGeometry it is simple to retrieve WKT and HEX, e.g., 'g.wkt'
> or 'g.hex'. However, KML is implemented by PostGIS and can only be
> retrieved if you do "SELECT AsKML(the_geom)" on the database end.
> Further, GML (ancestor to KML, another OGC standard) and SVG can
> How do you handle data input of GIS types? What format is used during
> assignment?
During assignment, PostGIS returns in a format called HEXEWKB
(hereinafter "HEX"), one of its 'canonical forms'. Essentially it's a
hexadecimal string of the binary format (WKB, an OGC standard). For
input you
On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 08:58 +, SmileyChris wrote:
[...]
> I actually like Malcom's proposal. Can't say I'd be thrilled if it was
> on by default though.
Since this is actually a good idea, we should give credit where it's
due: the whole theory behind this (and most of the details) is Simon
Wi
On 4/18/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would you consider adding a thumbnail capability to Django? I know
> there are contributions out there that do it and the dependency on PIL
> might be a negative but I believe this is a very common use case. How
> many apps have an image
Just a question out to the developers-
Would you consider adding a thumbnail capability to Django? I know
there are contributions out there that do it and the dependency on PIL
might be a negative but I believe this is a very common use case. How
many apps have an image field and don't use some
Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> On 4/19/07, jbronn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The GIS branch (GeoDjango) is interested in type coercion.
>> Specifically, PostGIS returns geometries as hex strings to the client
>> -- it would be preferable to have this come into the model as either a
>> differ
On 4/18/07, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What exactly was the issue you were having? Ofhand, a ShellCommand
> with haltOnFailure=True ought to suffice- last I looked, y'alls test
> runner properly set the exit code if a failure was detected, thus you
> should be able to rely on that
On 4/18/07, Matthew Flanagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The script [1] I'm using for the Django pybots [2] is very simple. The
> only thing I'd like to get going is testing against different
> backends. Do you have a problem with running it on pybots, except for
> the fact it isn't testing again
On 4/19/07, jbronn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The GIS branch (GeoDjango) is interested in type coercion.
> Specifically, PostGIS returns geometries as hex strings to the client
> -- it would be preferable to have this come into the model as either a
> different type of string like WKT ("POLYGO
On 4/19/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 4/18/07, Jonathan Daugherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Do you have a resident buildbot? That could be used to run the
> > regression tests on (all pythons) x (all databases). It would still
> > take time, of course, but it could
On 4/18/07, Gulopine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 17, 9:03 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> I don't know what
> other field types there might be in the future, but it seems like a
> stretch to think that it's unnecessary just because I can't anticipate
> other spec
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 11:16:56AM -0500, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>
> On 4/18/07, Jonathan Daugherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Do you have a resident buildbot? That could be used to run the
> > regression tests on (all pythons) x (all databases). It would still
> > take time, of course, bu
Thinking about it more, I wouldn't actually be against Malcom's
autoescaping solution being on by default - I do see the importance of
solid XSS protection!
I can also see a solution which would maintain backwards compatibility
for old sites:
TEMPLATE_AUTOESCAPE=False in conf.global_settings
TEMP
On 18 Apr, 23:05, SmileyChris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure this is really adding that much. Why can't you just use
> reverse as it stands? It doesn't seem hard to do:
> >>> some_id = 1
> >>> reverse(some_view, kwargs=dict(id=some_id))
> '/event/1/'
> or:
> >>> reverse(
Matt,
That's a good point you brought up: if there's a ForeignKey to a model
with a geographic field, then the model with the ForeignKey requires
GeoManager to construct geographic queries on related objects (even if
the model itself does not have geographic fields).
The GeoManager overrides the
> Coercion of the type you describe is not required for any field
> currently supported. I would be hesitant to include coercion as a core
> part of the framework unless there is a generic need to coerce
> database values into Python values in some way other than that
> performed by the database b
I'm not sure this is really adding that much. Why can't you just use
reverse as it stands? It doesn't seem hard to do:
>>> some_id = 1
>>> reverse(some_view, kwargs=dict(id=some_id))
'/event/1/'
or:
>>> reverse(some_view, args=[some_id])
'/event/1/'
--~--~-~--~~--
On 4/18/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 4/18/07, Daniel Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Something has been bugging me for a while..
>
> This type of complaint seems to come up every few months. I'm always tempted
> to
> ignore it because I have a hard time responding
Matt Riggott wrote:
> from django.core.urlresolvers import reverse
>
> def absolute_url(viewname, *args, **kwargs):
> return reverse(viewname, args=args or [], kwargs=kwargs or {})
As far as I can tell you don't need 'or []' and 'or {}' since they will
be [] and {} already when
Hoi,
Another small notice. Pylons and other frameworks thought about
implementing "__html__" for objects that return an html representation
of the object. If there is none it's converted to unicode and escaped.
Adding something like "__html__ = lambda s: s" to the escaped string
base classes coul
A little more research shows that I could also accomplish what I'm
looking for by tying into the pre_init or post_init signal, but then
I'd need a customized function for each field that needs processing,
on each model. This could be done, of course, and it would certainly
keep this coercion out o
Hi folks,
Something I find myself writing for each new Django project is a small
wrapper for the django.core.urlresolvers.reverse function. It usually
looks something like this:
from django.core.urlresolvers import reverse
def absolute_url(viewname, *args, **kwargs):
return reve
On 4/18/07, Jonathan Daugherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you have a resident buildbot? That could be used to run the
> regression tests on (all pythons) x (all databases). It would still
> take time, of course, but it could at least be automated[1][2].
I've spent some time in the past try
On Wed, Apr 18, Jonathan Daugherty wrote:
>
> # 7. Run the regression tests against every supported version of Python
> #with every database backend available.
>
> Do you have a resident buildbot? That could be used to run the
> regression tests on (all pythons) x (all databases).
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> I've filed tickets and bugs against many other projects, and as you
> might expect the results run the gamut from "fuck you"[1] to being
> checked in instantly.
> ...
> [1] No prizes for guessing which project this was.
I'll have a shot anyway: RoR? ;-}
http://www.fl
Hi
Ok, sorry about that Jacob!
Thanks for pointing me at right place!
Best Regards,
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers
# 7. Run the regression tests against every supported version of Python
#with every database backend available.
Do you have a resident buildbot? That could be used to run the
regression tests on (all pythons) x (all databases). It would still
take time, of course, but it could at le
On 4/18/07, Daniel Brandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Something has been bugging me for a while..
This type of complaint seems to come up every few months. I'm always tempted to
ignore it because I have a hard time responding in a way that doesn't end up
making me sound like a dick; usually that
Michael Radziej wrote:
> gettext('blablabla %s blablalba') % \
> "utf8 bytestring with funny รครค chars"
>
> If gettext returned unicode, python would decode the utf8 encoded
> bytestring, again using ASCII as default encoding -> exception galore ;-)
I believe we should teach people to start usi
On Apr 17, 9:03 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Coercion of the type you describe is not required for any field
> currently supported. I would be hesitant to include coercion as a core
> part of the framework unless there is a generic need to coerce
> database values into Py
On Wed, Apr 18, Daniel Brandt wrote:
>
> Something has been bugging me for a while..
>
> Check out http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3012 for a pretty
> critical patch to the locmem cache backend. The patch is accepted and
> ready for checkin, and more than two weeks have passed since. The b
On Apr 17, 9:03 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Coercion of the type you describe is not required for any field
> currently supported. I would be hesitant to include coercion as a core
> part of the framework unless there is a generic need to coerce
> database values into Py
Hi Chris,
On Wed, Apr 18, SmileyChris wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 3:48 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > In the past threads, we basically had consensus anyway, I'm not sure
> > that revisiting everything again is worth the hassle.
>
> Without trying to rock the boat... reading
Something has been bugging me for a while..
Check out http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3012 for a pretty
critical patch to the locmem cache backend. The patch is accepted and
ready for checkin, and more than two weeks have passed since. The bug
itself was filed in february. What am I missing
On Apr 18, 3:48 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> In the past threads, we basically had consensus anyway, I'm not sure
> that revisiting everything again is worth the hassle.
Without trying to rock the boat... reading back, I'm not sure there
was a resounding consensus.
I actua
On Apr 18, 3:48 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Unfortunately, the AutoEscapingAlternative page uses strawmen to try and
> make its arguments.
Ok, it's less "controversial" now.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are su
37 matches
Mail list logo
