On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 09:22 -0800, rajeesh wrote:
> I just want to register a similar issue. Had opened a ticket, #10057,
> with patch on a trivial matter as http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10057.
> Haven't found even any comments regarding its feasibility etc. Can't
> figure out whether peop
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 15:56 +0900, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
[...]
> There is a slight complication, though. The ordering of values() and
> annotate() is significant - values() controls the grouping of
> annotated values if it precedes the annotate().
This is the nub of the problem, isn't it. We
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 10:23 -0800, Ben Gerdemann wrote:
> This seems kind of
> ugly, but I'll bet there are many frameworks out there that simply
> ignore unknown parameters. Thoughts?
Ignoring portions of a URL sounds pretty broken. Our goal isn't to be
like other frameworks. It's to behave cor
On Sat, 2009-02-07 at 12:35 +0100, David Larlet wrote:
[...]
> Then on validation, my first idea was to allow
> form.fields.DEFAULT_DATE/TIME_INPUT_FORMATS to be overridden by
> settings and I think it makes sense because from my experience, when
> you decide to create a website (let's say,
On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 03:32 -0800, Waldemar Kornewald wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> On 6 Feb., 11:34, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> > I would suggest to you that the broader project of "modifying the
> > django.db.models interface to be fully independent of SQL" is much
> > more likely to get core dev
On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 09:51 -0500, David Stenglein wrote:
> I have to ask a question here. Why is there such reticence regarding
> App Engine? It would
> seem to me that App Engine has been a feather in the cap for Django. A
> lot of people don't know Django and at a previous job, I was able to
>
On Sun, 2009-02-08 at 23:52 -0600, Gary Wilson Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Vinicius Mendes wrote:
> >> So I decided to write a new messages app and it works very well, the only
> >> problem is the django.core.context
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Ludvig Ericson
wrote:
>
> Feb 8, Russell Keith-Magee:
>> First off - it isn't impossible to do what you are describing with the
>> existing setup. There is no reason you couldn't override _pre_setup()
>> in your subclass and either re-instantiate self.client, or
Feb 8, Russell Keith-Magee:
> First off - it isn't impossible to do what you are describing with the
> existing setup. There is no reason you couldn't override _pre_setup()
> in your subclass and either re-instantiate self.client, or modify the
> self.client instance that has already been created.
