I know it's obscenely early, but have any of the developers tried
running django on Python?
Griffin
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to d
Sorry, obviously I meant Python 3.
Griffin
On Sep 1, 2007, at 9:53 PM, Griffin Caprio wrote:
> I know it's obscenely early, but have any of the developers tried
> running django on Python?
>
> Griffin
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
On Wednesday 29 August 2007 13:40:44 George Vilches wrote:
> I looked at the possibility of both of those fixes, and they seem
> doable, but they would require adding special handler code just for
> QuerySets (especially the one to get the SQL generated code instead
> of the QuerySet). I think I
Thanks for replying Jay
Yeah, I thought that adding __slots__ to the Django model would be
enough, since the __dict__ is meant to get replaced by accessors as
you have pointed out. But I have been running the code, and it hasn't
worked as expected, that is why I had to write the __getattr__. It
w
On 9/1/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 21:18 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've been looking at ticket #4412:
>
> I was (and remain) -1 on letting it be part of models.
Apologies - I misread your vote as 'prefer it wasn't in the
Aha, sorry the models changed I was looking in newforms for maxlength.
My mistake
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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@goo
On Aug 31, 2:13 am, Collin Grady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The change he proposes would also break normal saving :)
>
> f = Foo(id=3, name="some new name")
> f.save()
>
> Would start throwing an exception since the row already existed but it
> would be trying to insert.
There's also an oppos
On 9/1/07, onno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well it is still in the docs so. Maybe adjust it a soon a possible so
> people will start the correct version.
If you find a location in the documentation that still refers to
maxlength, it is in error. We have tried to find all the references to
max
Well it is still in the docs so. Maybe adjust it a soon a possible so
people will start the correct version.
thx
On Sep 1, 11:25 am, SmileyChris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (well at least this is a different complaint than normal)
>
> On Sep 1, 9:00 pm, onno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In
(well at least this is a different complaint than normal)
On Sep 1, 9:00 pm, onno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the models we write maxlength
Hi Onno,
Not any more you don't. Check out the latest svn version (but we've
still kept it backwards compatible, so it still works with maxlength
too).
In the models we write maxlength
in the form we write max_length?
Why is there this diffrence? Is that logical?
Onno
PS. thanxs for writing Django.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developer
11 matches
Mail list logo