r9756 contains the changes to make django.test.TestCase use transaction
rollback (where available) instead of database flush/reload for resetting
the database. This can provide a nice speedup when running large test
suites -- the Django/sqlite buildbot went from around 20 minutes for the
test run
http://youfindr.com/buzz
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 email to
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Brian Rosner wrote:
> I think this definitely the right direction. An outstanding admin
> ticket that this is touching very heavily on is #3987. You've done a
> really good job making the right abstractions. I went a step further
> and figured this should be inclu
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Marty Alchin wrote:
> While working again with files for model validation, I realized (and
> confirmed with Russ, Honza and Alex in IRC) that the tests put in as a
> fix for #6009[1] don't actually prove all the behavior that ticket
> refers to. They prove that U
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> I'm pretty happy with the approach, but honestly I don't use the admin
> all that hard so I'm not 100% confidant that the design is perfect. So
> I'd love a quick review of the latest patch on #8306 (also available
> on github:
> http:/
> Because I deleted that object. Delete method should be non-reversible
> (except in transactions) like "del" statement in Python. Or anybody
> knows any reason, why it should be reversible?
You didn't delete the object. That'd be spelled ``del instance``. You
called a method called ``delete`` on
I think ORM supposed to have save insert and update:
save(force_insert=False,force_update=False)
update() == save(force_update=True)
insert() == save(force_insert=True)
in that situation we could have clean code and we know that update is
realy update on DB
i now we can have save(force_update=T
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Collin Grady wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jan Bednařík wrote:
>> That should not happen.
>>
>> instance.delete()
>> instance.save()
>>
>> should raise ObjectDoesNotExist exception. Any other behavior is bug.
>
> Why? You have a perfectly valid objec
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>
> Hi folks --
>
> Building on some work James did, I've cleaned up formfield_for_dbfield
> to make field overrides easier in the admin.
>
> I'm pretty happy with the approach, but honestly I don't use the admin
> all that hard so I'm not
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jan Bednařík wrote:
> That should not happen.
>
> instance.delete()
> instance.save()
>
> should raise ObjectDoesNotExist exception. Any other behavior is bug.
Why? You have a perfectly valid object instance, and you're then saving it.
Just like if you had instan
2009/1/15 Ian Kelly :
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Jan Bednařík wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Sebastian Bauer wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I think it's a bug, but maybe im wrong:
>>>
>>>
>>> print Categories.objects.count()
>>> >>0
>>> new_obj = Categories.objects.create(name
Hi folks --
Building on some work James did, I've cleaned up formfield_for_dbfield
to make field overrides easier in the admin.
I'm pretty happy with the approach, but honestly I don't use the admin
all that hard so I'm not 100% confidant that the design is perfect. So
I'd love a quick review of
Hi Kevin --
Just like your first question, this one also belongs on django-users.
Please direct your questions over there.
Thanks.
Jacob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
T
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Harryanto Ie wrote:
> i've looked the django documentation and there are
> solution for deploying django project into web server, but
> when i took those solution and implement to my web server
> (in this case, i use apache), there are several settings
> inside ht
One way or another this is a question better suited for the
django-users mailing list:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users
The developers list is for issues relating to the development of the
internals of django.
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Harryanto Ie wrote:
> i've looked the dja
how's to make the port number dissapear from the localhost or
webserver?
when i run the server, (localhost using python), it's showing the
statement that django project running at 127.0.0.1:8000
where is the file that must be changed to dissapear the port number?
thx
--~--~-~--~~--
i've looked the django documentation and there are
solution for deploying django project into web server, but
when i took those solution and implement to my web server
(in this case, i use apache), there are several settings
inside httpd.conf for django that made me confuse...
can you help me,
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Eric Holscher wrote:
> You both are indeed correct. I certainly think that the current patch can
> go in today as presented. The Ellington test suite is passing with a 10x
> speedup. We can get it to 40x speedup if we change out doctests that load
> fixtures into u
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <
> freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Eric Holscher
>> wrote:
>> > I think that if there is a plan to ever include fixtures into doctests,
>> then
>>
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Eric Holscher
> wrote:
> > I think that if there is a plan to ever include fixtures into doctests,
> then
> > we should put transaction management into them. We should also decide on
> a
> > syntax (
This question most properly belongs on the django-users list.
Also, you may want to consider spending some time with the Django
documentation (in particular, searching the docs index for the word
"deploy").
--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct."
--~--
i've finished my django project development and i want to deploy it to
web server, but i can't deploy it, what is the step that i must do for
deploying django project? i use apache as the web server. thx
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you a
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Jan Bednařík wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Sebastian Bauer wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I think it's a bug, but maybe im wrong:
>>
>>
>> print Categories.objects.count()
>> >>0
>> new_obj = Categories.objects.create(name="test")
>> instance_1 = Categories
Russ, thanks a lot for your work on this feature and for letting us track
the development on your git branch.
Regards
Ariel.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this
Russell,
You forgot to thank yourself for the great mentoring you did for me during
Summer of Code, getting the API to rock and for all the work you put into
making the code better after SoC was finished. =)
I am very glad to see this finally come to trunk!
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Russ
While working again with files for model validation, I realized (and
confirmed with Russ, Honza and Alex in IRC) that the tests put in as a
fix for #6009[1] don't actually prove all the behavior that ticket
refers to. They prove that Unicode filenames come through fine from
uploads, but that test
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Jan Bednařík wrote:
> this is happening, because Django ORM is not working as what you
> expect from ORM.
>
> In real ORM, this:
No... I don't think you mean "real ORM", I think you mean
"identity-mapping ORM". Those terms are not the same.
--
"Bureaucrat Conra
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Sebastian Bauer wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I think it's a bug, but maybe im wrong:
>
>
> print Categories.objects.count()
> >>0
> new_obj = Categories.objects.create(name="test")
> instance_1 = Categories.objects.get(pk=new_obj.pk)
> instance_2 = Categories.objects.get(p
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 6:57 AM, Ivan Sagalaev
wrote:
>
> Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> > For those watching trunk, revision 9742 added aggregate support to
> > Django. (Yay!)
>
> Thank you all very much! This is big.
>
> >
> Tremendous thanks to Nicholas for writing this thing, and to Russ for
mak
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:51 AM, David Cramer wrote:
>
> Actually before I get a "wtf" response, I should note that the two
> generators do not quite match. One is rendering a template, the other
> is simply yielding XML. The latter approach is what I prefer, but I
> was rushing to finish the ind
Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> For those watching trunk, revision 9742 added aggregate support to
> Django. (Yay!)
Thank you all very much! This is big.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django develope
Hi all,
For those watching trunk, revision 9742 added aggregate support to
Django. (Yay!)
The short version is that Querysets now have two additional operations
- annotate() and aggregate(). For details on how to use these new
operations, see the documentation:
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/
32 matches
Mail list logo
