On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Will Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> is anyone planning to write, or has anyone already written a script to
> help people convert their oldforms-admin to newforms-admin?
...
> Would this be useful enough to include in django itself?
If someone wan
On 6/9/08, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know why this is so mysterious. A small amount of browsing
> turns up that the code was added in revision [4916] and specifically
> enabled for Oracle only to fix ticket #3743.
But it does not explain why ticket #3030 has been closed
The ticket is in the tracking sistem: #7256. I have claimed it, but am
not planning to start working on it until I'm done with aggregation
(or maybe in EuroPython's sprint), so if anybody bits me to it, it
would be great.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Gary Wilson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Would this be useful enough to include in django itself?
This could be posted somewhere on djangoproject.com or
djangosnippets.org. I wouldn't recommend using the management commands
- this is a one-off operation and there's no need to change django
itself (besides, people will probably want to
You might want to checkout this conversion utility
http://groups.google.com/group/satchmo-developers/browse_thread/thread/ac4de8c3435cac61/7f1e768116b1b6fd
http://nilsliberg.se/python/django/newforms_gen2.html
On 11 Jun., 07:22, "Will Hardy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> is anyone plan
Hi all,
is anyone planning to write, or has anyone already written a script to
help people convert their oldforms-admin to newforms-admin?
If not, I was thinking of writing a little script (mangement comand)
that would find all the oldforms-admin definitions in installed models
and output a newf
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 18:14:17 -0500, James Bennett wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Rob Hudson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think the most often reason why I've heard is that it takes time to
>> create a release, post it, push security patches to it, etc. Which
>> makes sense, but a
Nicolas E. Lara G. wrote:
> I was wondering if there was some sort of design decision on this or
> was just not implemented (yet).
I would say it just hasn't been implemented yet.
> Adding the fields to appear in the dictionary seams like an easy fix
> that
> I might do while working on aggregat
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 6:46 AM, Edgars Jēkabsons
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There are 1116 active tickets right now, 341 of them haven't even been
> reviewed and 201 of the remaining 775 tickets are waiting on a design
> decision from the core developers or community. I can't even know if
> an
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 6:58 AM, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Where I'm from, exactly 1 is singular, and anything else is plural.
>
pluralize(1.1)
> u''
>
> That looks like a bug to me.
You could be right. Examples are a bit hard to think of, but to my
understanding:
* It was
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Rob Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Dango devs,
>
> I wanted to publicly apologize for the framing of my question... I
> meant it to be humorously provocative but I fear it could be easily
> misread to be rude and annoying, and not easily turned into some
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Edgars Jēkabsons
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to remind everyone involved that Django development really
> seems to stale when looking at active tickets.
>
> There are 1116 active tickets right now, 341 of them haven't even been
> reviewed and 201 of the re
Where I'm from, exactly 1 is singular, and anything else is plural.
>>> from django.template.defaultfilters import pluralize
>>> pluralize(1)
u''
>>> pluralize(2)
u's'
So far so good.
>>> pluralize(1.1)
u''
That looks like a bug to me.
The trouble is here:
if int(value) != 1:
That's rounding
Hello,
First I'd like to introduce myself - I've used Django for hobby and
some small projects on and off pretty much from the day it was
opensourced. I have more or less followed it's development all the
time. Now like many other I choose to use newforms-admin branch for
new development. My posi
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Gabriel Sean Farrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> direct_to_template, I'd rather avoid abusing a function by ignoring
> its name and exercising largely undocumented functionality. After
> all, my params aren't going directly to the template.
Calling a generic v
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:24 PM, testguy56 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, starting a reply like that makes you sound like an elitist douche
> bag.
I suspect I'm being trolled here, but if my lame-ass attempt at humor
offended anyone else, I apologize.
If anyone has a problem with me please f
In response to http://fi.am/entry/shortcutting-render_to_response/ --
posting it here rather than some little comment box.
PART 1: A Bold Diff
---
In regard to the clumsiness of render_to_response and RequestContext,
I too like the solution at http://www.djangosnippets.org/snippet
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 11:30 PM, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The impression I get is that a lot of people rely on silent *variable*
>> failure, but very few rely on silent *tag* failure. In fact, most
>> real-world custom template tags I've seen are wire
www.freeservice6.blogspot.com
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send ema
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Wow, this thread keeps on keepin' on, eh?
Wow, starting a reply like that makes you sound like an elitist.
Why not instead say, "There has been a few interesting proposals in
this thread," followed by your impending proposal announcement. You
run a high-profile, popula
(incidentally, for anyone who's joining in and wants to genuinely add
to the discussion: starting your reply by calling one of the
developers a douchebag causes me, at least, to stop listening and
simply assume you're a troll. The more you know...)
--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically cor
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 12:24 PM, testguy56 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, starting a reply like that makes you sound like an elitist douche
> bag.
I love the smell of troll in the morning, don't you?
--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct."
--~--~--
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Wow, this thread keeps on keepin' on, eh?
Wow, starting a reply like that makes you sound like an elitist douche
bag.
Why not instead say, "There has been a few interesting proposals in
this thread," followed by your impending proposal announcement. You
run a high-prof
On 6/10/08, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not certain that this route is perfect, but it seems to be a
> compromise of both worlds.
We use the same approach with mean time redundancy about 1 months.
Peter
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this messag
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Rob Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am curious if anyone thinks having support for outputting html4
> compliant markup in Django is a good thing? And if so, what can I do
> to help make that become a reality?
I for one would appreciate it, because I'm abot
I was in discussions at work on what version to work with on a
enterprise level project with the intent of using 1.0 when it comes
out.
We discussed using 0.96, and tracking trunk. Both routes mean a lot
of maintenance.
If we stay with 0.96, that means that when 1.0 comes out there will be
a lo
Hi Dango devs,
I wanted to publicly apologize for the framing of my question... I
meant it to be humorously provocative but I fear it could be easily
misread to be rude and annoying, and not easily turned into something
productive. That wasn't my intention.
I am curious if anyone thinks having
Wow, this thread keeps on keepin' on, eh?
So here's the deal. The core developers have always had a vague idea
about what would be in 1.0 and when it would be released, but it's
apparent we've not been formal enough about that plan. To wit, many
folks are complaining about a lack of a feature lis
On Jun 10, 2008, at 12:28, mrts wrote:
> * contrib.localflavor should be deprecated and transferred to a
> separate project or contributed to Babel.
>
> It is incomplete by nature as covering all regions/postal codes in
> the world takes a lot of effort.
> That effort is out of Django's scope.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:26 AM, Marc Fargas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There are two things about get_NEXT/PREVIOUS_by_DATEFIELD() which I'm
> not sure if a bug should be filled agains (almost sure anyway).
>
> given a simple model like:
>
>class TestModel(models.Model):
>
Le 10 juin 08 à 03:16, Karen Tracey a écrit :
> I'd trade your controversial part for an alternative: merge mewforms-
> admin back to trunk now.
+1 if involved people in this branch agree (I hadn't found the time to
test it yet...).
> I think it's a shame newforms-admin wasn't done in a fash
+1. For my purposes, newforms-admin *is* trunk.
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Karen Tracey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> * Start a "train release" schedule: schedule a couple of 1.0 betas, a
>> rc or two, and t
> I'd trade your controversial part for an alternative: merge mewforms-admin
> back to trunk now. It's been as 'usable' as old admin for months. Sure,
> it's got a couple of dozen 'blocking' bugs in the tracker but none of them
> are all that serious. Current admin, as you note, also has some b
On Jun 1, 8:20 am, "Yuri Baburov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, how about an idea of adding request, object, and action to
> ModelAdmin instances in newforms-admin code rather than in user code
> and refactoring newforms-admin code based on this decision?
We've used that exact trick recently a
Please give you thougths on the following.
* contrib.localflavor should be deprecated and transferred to a
separate project or contributed to Babel.
It is incomplete by nature as covering all regions/postal codes in
the world takes a lot of effort.
That effort is out of Django's scope.
And I would also organise a sprint 3-4 weeks after the merge dedicated
to fixing bugs in NFA.
On Jun 10, 7:40 pm, Julien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 for merging newforms-admin ASAP.
>
> On Jun 10, 7:13 pm, "Gábor Farkas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Adrian
+1 for merging newforms-admin ASAP.
On Jun 10, 7:13 pm, "Gábor Farkas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> * Start a "train release" sch
Hi,
There are two things about get_NEXT/PREVIOUS_by_DATEFIELD() which I'm
not sure if a bug should be filled agains (almost sure anyway).
given a simple model like:
class TestModel(models.Model):
date = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True)
m = TestModel()
m.get_previo
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * Start a "train release" schedule: schedule a couple of 1.0 betas, a
>> rc or two, and then a final release. Features that are done by
>
> I'd trade your controversial part for an alternative: merge mewforms-admin
> back to trunk now. It's been as 'usable' as old admin for months. Sure,
> it's got a couple of dozen 'blocking' bugs in the tracker but none of them
> are all that serious. Current admin, as you note, also has some
Hi,
i am cross-posting this from Django users because it might be more an
internal issue than a user problem. The original post is here:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thread/thread/652f35c90ef14f23
I'm currently facing a weird problem with the testing framework after
updati
I think your solution works, but as you already said, it's a bit
verbose. I actually don't see the problem with having the additional
arguments. Each backend constructor would have to have a trailing
**kwargs, and could pick and choose what it wants from the keyword
arguments given.
In your exa
Am 10.06.2008 um 03:16 schrieb Karen Tracey:
> I'd trade your controversial part for an alternative: merge mewforms-
> admin back to trunk now. It's been as 'usable' as old admin for
> months. Sure, it's got a couple of dozen 'blocking' bugs in the
> tracker but none of them are all that serious
Am 10.06.2008 um 03:16 schrieb Karen Tracey:
> I'd trade your controversial part for an alternative: merge mewforms-
> admin back to trunk now. It's been as 'usable' as old admin for
> months. Sure, it's got a couple of dozen 'blocking' bugs in the
> tracker but none of them are all that se
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 21:16 -0400, Karen Tracey wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Start a "train release" schedule: schedule a couple of 1.0
> betas, a
> rc or two, and then a final release. Features that are done by
45 matches
Mail list logo
