> > However, that's a good reason to have sessions pluggable -- if
> > persistence is important, then you need db sessions.
What about file for sessions like in php? I want sessions to be very
fast, but
memory solution is bad for development and production because you lose
all your session data b
On 6/7/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alternatively (and I suspect this is a variation on what Marty is
> suggesting), move all the url processing bit out of __call__() and into
> a function that __call__ calls. Then that function can be overridden in
> the subclass. Notice th
I had yet another suggestion: use template vars for block repetitions, such as:
{% block title %}Page Title{% endblock %} | Some Site
{{ block.title }}
Make the "block object" suitably lazy and in most cases I would think
it "should just work"... (I used {{ block.title }} rather than {{
b
On 6/9/07, Masida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is anyone working on FileField/ImageField support for the admin in
> newforms-admin?
> This isn't currently working (even with the latest patch from ticket
> #3297).
I uploaded a patch yesterday to add FileField/ImageField support in
the general ca
On Jun 9, 9:32 am, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Realize it's hit trunk already,
No worries, we can always open another ticket :)
> but noticed an annoying potential
> gotcha- for single var in a for loop, any changes to the context stay
> put- for multiple vars, the context gets wip
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:53:07PM +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
> On 6/6/07, SmileyChris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > New patch uploaded, taking into account Brian's thoughts (and fixing a
> > small bug):
> >
> > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3523#comment:11
>
> Ok; I've had a
This came up on IRC the other day and I had an idea on the subject -
I'm not sure if this would actually work well or not, but it can't
hurt to toss it out there :)
I was thinking of some format like so:
{% block foo,bar %}New content{% endblock %}
And having that now override both foo and bar.
Is anyone working on FileField/ImageField support for the admin in
newforms-admin?
This isn't currently working (even with the latest patch from ticket
#3297).
If nobody is working on it right now, I'll have a look at it and come
up with a patch...
(I'm actually using the newforms-admin branch for
yep, tried that.
On Jun 7, 6:54 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I haven't tried this at all myself, as I just use mysql ...but are you
> saying that specifying a different DATABASE_ENGINE in the
> OTHER_DATABASES entries doesn't work? Was just making sure you had
> tried tha
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 15:27 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Right...I understand that although, based on information from
> another post (yesterday I believe) I don't think that is working right
> now, unless the poster was doing something incorrectly... he hasn't
> answered my reply, so I'm
Right...I understand that although, based on information from
another post (yesterday I believe) I don't think that is working right
now, unless the poster was doing something incorrectly... he hasn't
answered my reply, so I'm not sure as of yet.
But in the case that one was using the same da
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 14:49 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We had the need to run some reports across databases, and this
> limitation in the django multi-db branch prevented me from doing them
> correctly...so our DBA wrote up some code using mysqldb that executes
> queries across the dbs... n
We had the need to run some reports across databases, and this
limitation in the django multi-db branch prevented me from doing them
correctly...so our DBA wrote up some code using mysqldb that executes
queries across the dbs... not sure if it is just valid in mysql. Our
dbs are currently all on
> Aside from the "urgh!" factor from writing the content in multiple
> times, if you are going to do this, why not just create a "reuse-block"
> tag that re-inserts the block value the template parser has already
> worked out previously? Doesn't need any change to the behaviour of
> "block" then.
On 08/06/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 6/8/07, Noam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Let me improve my suggestion, so that it mostly solves James' concern
> > and can be explained in one sentence:
> >
> > -
> > Multiple blocks with the same name would be allowed, as long
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 13:25 +, Noam wrote:
> Let me improve my suggestion, so that it mostly solves James' concern
> and can be explained in one sentence:
>
> -
> Multiple blocks with the same name would be allowed, as long as all of
> them have the same content.
> -
>
> This
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 13:08 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It would be nice if both the trunk as well as multi db fully
> qualilfied all field names with db.table.field name
Where would you want it to do that?
You can't just do it everywhere that the field name is used in SQL,
because it
On 6/8/07, Noam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let me improve my suggestion, so that it mostly solves James' concern
> and can be explained in one sentence:
>
> -
> Multiple blocks with the same name would be allowed, as long as all of
> them have the same content.
> -
I'm not sure
Let me improve my suggestion, so that it mostly solves James' concern
and can be explained in one sentence:
-
Multiple blocks with the same name would be allowed, as long as all of
them have the same content.
-
This would solve my (and others, not including SmileyChris, sorry!)
p
On 6/8/07, Noam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I admit that it looks better, because you gave meaning to the blocks,
> but you still have to use two files when one would have sufficed and
> would have stated clearly what you want.
Well, one might suffice for some, but I have a 4-layer inheritance
s
On Jun 8, 2:52 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I should note that I withdraw my +1. Not only does James bring up some
> good points, I just realized that Noam's example can be done without
> the whole {%block silly %} thing.
>
I admit that it looks better, because you gave meaning
It would be nice if both the trunk as well as multi db fully
qualilfied all field names with db.table.field name I think that
if this was done, the trunk could actually support multiple databases
as long as the login credentials were the same for all databases and
they were on the same server.
Good stuff! Can't wait to start using newforms-admin outside of my
sandbox...
Thanks for the work!
regards,
Simon
On Jun 8, 9:30 am, "Joseph Kocherhans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/7/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 6/7/07, Honza Král <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
I'm -0 on this too, even though I have run into a situation where I
wanted a block to appear twice in a base template, and the content of
the block was defined in the view template (can't remember the
details). The additional complication and strange rules are not worth
the benefit (and I'm not ev
On 6/8/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 6/7/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/7/07, Honza Kr�l <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Since we really need newforms-admin for this project, my employer
> > > agreed to pay me to work on the newforms-admin if
On 6/7/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 6/7/07, Honza Král <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Since we really need newforms-admin for this project, my employer
> > agreed to pay me to work on the newforms-admin if necessary, so if
> > there is anything I can do to help I will be g
26 matches
Mail list logo
