Re: List of DDN Tickets

2008-06-23 Thread AmanKow
hmmm... next time, coffee first, post second. Appologies... On Jun 23, 1:55 pm, Collin Grady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > AmanKow said the following: > > > Actually, 'required' is an argument to the *Model* field constructor, > > and models are *not* always initialized from html forms.  The fiel

Django book seeking Tech Reviewer

2008-06-23 Thread Marty Alchin
Hey all, First, I apologize for posting this on django-dev, since I know it's not development *of* Django, but I didn't want to add to the noise on django-users, and most of the people I'm hoping to reach are frequent readers of this list. No need to flame, I got it. As most of you are no doubt

Re: List of DDN Tickets

2008-06-23 Thread Collin Grady
AmanKow said the following: > Actually, 'required' is an argument to the *Model* field constructor, > and models are *not* always initialized from html forms. The field > certainly doesn't have to be represented as a checkbox in a form, > either. This is incorrect. Model fields have null and bla

Re: List of DDN Tickets

2008-06-23 Thread AmanKow
Probably not the place for this discussion, but... On Jun 22, 3:08 pm, Ludvig Ericson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ambiguous in this context. Two perceptions exist: > - required=True means the field has to be set. Following HTML form > logics, it always is. > - required=True means the require

GSoC: Aggregation

2008-06-23 Thread Nicolas E. Lara G.
Hello, Here are some updates on what's going on with aggregate support and some questions. The latest addition to aggregates is the possibility to aggregate on a set that already have annotations. This has been discussed before in [1] and [2]. So far it is implemented in a way that you can obtai

Re: Database weirdness in test harness

2008-06-23 Thread Luke Plant
On Monday 23 June 2008 14:03:48 Michael Glassford wrote: > Enough excuses. I'm usually more careful about looking closely at > something before replying, and I'll try to be next time. I'm also > looking at modifying Model._collect_sub_objects (to handle other > types of on_delete behavior besides

Re: Nullable foreignkeys do not let me retrieve records where the foreignkey is null

2008-06-23 Thread Mike H
Brilliant, I feel slightly less of a fool now. :) On 23 Jun 2008, at 15:05, George Vilches wrote: > > You'll be happy to know that there's a ticket in the system that > already resolves this problem: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/ > 7512 . It will properly LEFT JOIN whenever ordering oc

Re: Nullable foreignkeys do not let me retrieve records where the foreignkey is null

2008-06-23 Thread George Vilches
You'll be happy to know that there's a ticket in the system that already resolves this problem: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/ 7512 . It will properly LEFT JOIN whenever ordering occurs on null=True relationships on any of the major field types. gav On Jun 23, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Mik

Re: Nullable foreignkeys do not let me retrieve records where the foreignkey is null

2008-06-23 Thread Mike H
Gah... ignore! Even though the foreignkey was nullable, I had an ordering entry in the Meta class which ordered by deployment__name which forced the inner join. I'll be quiet now... ;-) Mike On 23 Jun 2008, at 14:51, Mike H wrote: > > Hi all, > > Before I rush off and possibly file a bogus

Nullable foreignkeys do not let me retrieve records where the foreignkey is null

2008-06-23 Thread Mike H
Hi all, Before I rush off and possibly file a bogus bug report, am I seeing incorrect behavior here? I have a simple 'Project' model, as so: class Project(models.Model): deployment = models.ForeignKey(Deployment, blank=True, null=True) ... some other fields here Some of the project

Re: Database weirdness in test harness

2008-06-23 Thread Michael Glassford
Luke Plant wrote: > On Friday 20 June 2008 23:40:43 Michael Glassford wrote: >> Django builds a list of all the objects that are foreign keyed to >> the one you are deleting and deletes those first, so it bypasses >> any ON DELETE clauses. I assume this is what you're seeing. > > Yes, this is the

Re: Using RequestContext by default in default 500 handler

2008-06-23 Thread Rudolph
Hi, You could generate your 500.html file by rendering a different template file that does get a RequestContext. This way you can use the MEDIA_URL and things like that without hardcoding them in your 500.html file. Ofcourse you need to regenerate your 500.html file when you change your settings,

Re: Using RequestContext by default in default 500 handler

2008-06-23 Thread Ludvig Ericson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jun 23, 2008, at 12:28, Jason Davies wrote: > The default error handler is easily overridden so that it tries using > RequestContext first and then falls back to using Context if that > fails. - -1, strong. You swallow an exception for another. Wi

Using RequestContext by default in default 500 handler

2008-06-23 Thread Jason Davies
Dear all, I have several clients who make heavy use of MEDIA_URL for styling their sites. The pages generated by the default 500 error handler look rather ugly without any CSS or images, and the lack of branding confuses customers. The default error handler is easily overridden so that it tries