You might also mention the existence of "junction.exe" on windows (see
[1]), which gives you more or less an equivalent of symlinks.
Also very practical, and maybe not known by too many people.
> Could you drop this into a wiki page, please. Give it a descriptive
> title and it will show up easil
Hi Adrian,
the current behaviour is not a random implementation detail. It's been discussed
in October 2006:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/e36e80faf653b6d4/15fbf502162bc564?lnk=gst
While interpreting __exact=None as "WHERE ... = NULL" might confuse new
us
On 7/16/07, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Didn't know about __ne before today. A lot easier than throwing on
> excludes :)
Whoop, my fault -- the "__ne" lookup no longer exists. You're right,
exclude() is the right way to do it.
Adrian
--
Adrian Holovaty
holovaty.com | djangoprojec
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 18:37 -0500, Carl Karsten wrote:
[...]
> Here is what I would recommend:
>
> # settings_sqlite.py
> DATABASE_ENGINE = 'sqlite3'
> DATABASE_NAME = 'demodb'
> ROOT_URLCONF=None
>
> rem testsqlite.bat
> runtests.py --settings settings_sqlite 2>&1
>
> The 2>1 thing so that it
On 7/16/07, Eugene Lazutkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Every process gets an individual instance of the locmem cache. It means
> that it is not shared between processes --- each processes cache their
> own items, you may have duplicates, and items cached by one process do
> not affect other proc
Carl Karsten wrote:
> Ran on a 2nd box. no fails.
>
> biggest diff I can think of: space in dir name of dir I was in on the first
> box. Any chance of this?
another diff:
used setup.py install on box with 3 errors, manually created dj.pth on the box
with no errors.
Carl K
--~--~-
On 7/17/07, Carl Karsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Right or wrong, doesn't seem like anyone is running the unit tests on win,
> and I
> bet the same applies to all the various environments. (which is OS * db).
We don't deliberately set out to break things on Windows, but Windows
gets used a
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 18:05 -0500, Carl Karsten wrote:
> I am trying to setup my site on a win box, not for production, but just to
> demo
> to a friend. I got errors, and so I tried the unit tests, and got 3 errors.
> (below)
>
> The summary from IRC:
> (04:46:25 PM) mattmcc: Hmm. Two trans
On 7/17/07, Casey T. Deccio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Requesting feedback regarding ticket #4312.
I think the feedback here is 'closed, wontfix'.
> This allows the developer to apply additional values to the (usually)
> new model instance, without having to follow the three-step process:
>
On 7/17/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/16/07, Etienne Robillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Jul 16 09:44:44 fluke postgres[51608]: [2-1] ERROR: insert or update on
> > table "sf_rates" violates foreign key constraint
> > "fk_calling_plan_id_refs_calling_plan_id
On 7/16/07, Etienne Robillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jul 16 09:44:44 fluke postgres[51608]: [2-1] ERROR: insert or update on
> table "sf_rates" violates foreign key constraint
> "fk_calling_plan_id_refs_calling_plan_id_6ccd374b"
> Any ideas/suggestions how to get foreign keys fields do
I forsee a patch incoming.. as soon as we make our crazy Django branch
fit w/ trunk :)
Didn't know about __ne before today. A lot easier than throwing on
excludes :)
On Jul 16, 2:19 pm, "Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/16/07, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is th
Ran on a 2nd box. no fails.
biggest diff I can think of: space in dir name of dir I was in on the first
box. Any chance of this?
Carl K
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" gro
Every process gets an individual instance of the locmem cache. It means
that it is not shared between processes --- each processes cache their
own items, you may have duplicates, and items cached by one process do
not affect other processes. Obviously there is no need for any kind of
inter-process
Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Carl Karsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> how about supplying the following 3 line tests/settings.py and making it the
>> default?
>
> I'm not sure I see the value. The simple case is trivial to set up;
> committing the simple case to trunk implicitly sugg
I am trying to setup my site on a win box, not for production, but just to demo
to a friend. I got errors, and so I tried the unit tests, and got 3 errors.
(below)
The summary from IRC:
(04:46:25 PM) mattmcc: Hmm. Two translation issues, and a unicode issue.
and a description of the problem
After some additional thought and review of the locmem code, it looks
like I was misunderstanding the note in the documentation. It seems
that being "multi-process and thread-safe" refers more to being able
to perform reads and writes to the cache from multiple processes and
threads without collis
Some time ago, I pondered the possibilities for sharing the dbsettings
cache across multiple processes in Apache and elsewhere. I ended up
just using Django's cache framework, and I finally received
confirmation that it does work properly. However, my original
assumption that locmem isn't multi-pr
On 7/16/07, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a specific reason that myfield=None doesn't translate to
> myfield__isnull=True in the database backend?
The reason is in the implementation details, but, come to think of it,
I agree that it'd be a lot more beautiful if myfield=None
As a beginner in django and databases but not in python i also had
over 2 days to find the is_null filter... None==Null is just more
pythonic and logical. If i may speak for other beginners... please
drop the is_null or wrap it internally when something is filtered
with None.
thanks
On 1
On Mon, Jul 16, David Cramer wrote:
>
> It's not so much related to ManyToMany. But None is Python's equiv to
> SQL's NULL.
> [...]
This was discussed and decided long time ago, please search the archives if
you are interested in the reasons.
Michael
--
noris network AG - Deutschherrnstraße
It's not so much related to ManyToMany. But None is Python's equiv to
SQL's NULL.
I'd very much like to see it evaluate to such, and I agree,
isnull=True should be deprecated.
On Jul 16, 9:46 am, "Benjamin Slavin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 7/16/07, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On 7/16/07, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is there a specific reason that myfield=None doesn't translate to
> myfield__isnull=True in the database backend?
Hi David,
You may want to look here: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/1050
- Ben
--~--~-~--~~~-
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 09:24:07AM -0700, David Cramer wrote:
>
> Is there a specific reason that myfield=None doesn't translate to
> myfield__isnull=True in the database backend?
myfield = None translates into the SQL expression myfield = NULL. This is not
really that useful, since that clause
Is there a specific reason that myfield=None doesn't translate to
myfield__isnull=True in the database backend?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send
Requesting feedback regarding ticket #4312.
(the ticket currently uses 'defaults' as the name of the argument, but I
would think 'values' or 'extra_values' would be more intuitive)
The addition of a dictionary argument to save_instance would allow the
developer to supply values for Model attribu
Hi,
Im trying to deserialize an csv row into a django object instance
but it fails to process foreign keys correctly. As far as I understand this
issue,
there's no such "field.attname" in the table which is necessary for making
the FK relationship:
Jul 16 09:44:44 fluke postgres[51608]: [2-
Russel, any ideas on handling the fields with a custom save method
later than regular fields?
Like doing a second for loop over the fields that have a custom save
method, or has a attribute that says it should be handled later.
So a model object can be saved in the save handler and have a pk, an
On 7/15/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm always interested in improving the testing capabilities built into
> Django. Can you elaborate on the types of tests/assertions/helpers
> that you have built, and the situations in which they would be useful?
>
> Yours,
> Russ Mage
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 03:33 -0500, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> Since I'm fiddling with the memcache backend post-unicode, I decided
> to run tests against all the backends while I was at it.
>
> (Apparently the cache tests aren't run against memcache very often,
> because test_not_existent has been the
On 7/12/07, Simon G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> #4845 is probably related here in some way, giving this traceback:
I've attached my patch and tests to that ticket.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Since I'm fiddling with the memcache backend post-unicode, I decided
to run tests against all the backends while I was at it.
(Apparently the cache tests aren't run against memcache very often,
because test_not_existent has been there since 3661 and never would
have worked against memcache.
More
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 02:19 -0500, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> I just ran into a subtle backwards incompatibility introduced in [5091].
>
> I've been pushing an instance of xml.sax.xmlreader.AttributesImpl onto
> my Context. AttributesImpl tries to implement a dictionary-like
> interface, including __
I just ran into a subtle backwards incompatibility introduced in [5091].
I've been pushing an instance of xml.sax.xmlreader.AttributesImpl onto
my Context. AttributesImpl tries to implement a dictionary-like
interface, including __getitem__, but not __contains__.
Somehow, no matter what the val
34 matches
Mail list logo
