On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Jonas Pfeil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> P.S.: I should have brought this up here earlier instead of causing a
> somewhat lengthy discussion on IRC, sorry for that. I hope James
> doesn't hate me after this ;)
I stand by what I said in the dev channel yesterday:
a python string is immutable
using the + operation on it causes strings to be copied into memory
and made into another immutable string... which doesn;t save much...
but the next uses of + requires another copy, and the next so on...
where as using % does copy once
On Aug 22, 4:49 am, Joost Casse
Dear Django developers,
The code importing urls.py has a flaw that is easy to fix but has the
potential to cause a lot of frustration especially for inexperienced
developers -- which I do hope will try out Django in large numbers
soon :)
The problem is this: When importing urls.py _any_ exceptio
Recently I noticed a bunch of queries I was executing by hand (one's
which the ORM didn't support) were not being committed.
I dug into the docs, and it clearly states that the default
transaction mode is autocommit, and mysql's default transaction mode
is autocommit.
So, my question is, what's
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7524 is tagged as post-1.0.
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8221 was closed as duplicate of
#7524, which it is not.
On Aug 23, 9:40 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 10:46 -0700, mrts wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I person
On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 10:46 -0700, mrts wrote:
[...]
> I personally think both should make it into 1.0, but James seems to
> oppose, so can we discuss this a bit further?
The ticket is open. It will either be committed, postponed or closed as
a dupe of something else. Let's leave it at that and
It is quite common to be hit by the insufficiently verbose reporting
that #8221 and #7524 fix -- e.g. see the duplicates that have popped
up.
As I already said, #8221 is only needed because the patch I provided
in #8177 and that got commited fixed only the most burning issue I was
directly hit wi
On Sat, 2008-08-23 at 16:02 +0200, Alex Rades wrote:
> Hi,
> validator_list in model fields (and maybe in form fields too) isn't
> working at the moment.
>
> Could we remove it from the docs?
It will be removed eventually, when all the remaining oldforms stuff is
removed (before 1.0). Also, the
Hi all,
In [8481], I committed a fix for #7443, dealing with a problem with
the timesince filter. About 20 minutes after I committed it, I became
aware of #8453, which is the same problem - except that #8453 suggests
that there has been a bigger discussion, and the ticket was closed
'invalid'. I'
On Aug 22, 5:56 pm, Justin Bronn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI, r8471 fixed my problems and all Oracle GeoDjango tests pass
> again. Thanks.
That's good news, Justin--thanks for verifying! (I have access to 9i
and 10g servers--not just XE--but spatial isn't licensed for any of
them so I had
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Aidas Bendoraitis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello folks!
>
> Django cares about model-view-controller separation, but the HTML for
> the widgets is hardcoded in the render method. I would propose to have
> overridable templates for the widgets, so every projec
Hello folks!
Django cares about model-view-controller separation, but the HTML for
the widgets is hardcoded in the render method. I would propose to have
overridable templates for the widgets, so every project could have
specific presentation of widgets in the system (render method should
take a
12 matches
Mail list logo
