On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Richard S wrote:
> when done is this giong to be as simple as adding installed apps to one DB
> or the other?
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Russell Keith-Magee <
>> freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrot
when done is this giong to be as simple as adding installed apps to one DB
or the other?
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Russell Keith-Magee <
> freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Alex Gaynor
>> wro
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Alex Gaynor
> wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > As you know by now I've been selected to work on multiple database
> support
> > in Django as a part of the Google Summer of Code. I'm going to try to
> k
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> As you know by now I've been selected to work on multiple database support
> in Django as a part of the Google Summer of Code. I'm going to try to keep
> this brief as a) not much of my API thoughts have changed since my origin
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
> I'm a little considered with the UI considerations of using one mechanism in
> multiple ways. We looked at having admin actions that could support all
> objects and specifically rejected it since it overloaded that UI element in
> a way tha
What I'm doing locally is just a small hack with get_absolute_url, but
ideally, if the object doesn't have an admin page, it would be the
same link as the "View on site" link on the admin page (if available).
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Zain Memon wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:13 PM, J
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Zain Memon wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>>
>> For one it's kind of annoying the FKey/m2m/etc don't link either to
>> the corresponding object's admin or site page if either are available
>> (checking for admin first, then for
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>
> For one it's kind of annoying the FKey/m2m/etc don't link either to
> the corresponding object's admin or site page if either are available
> (checking for admin first, then for site?). The fix should be very
> simple, just thought I'd a
> # Disable selecting dates before or after a certain date
This sounds like it should be general behaviour (adding min_date and
max_date to DateField or something similar - I thought this was
already in?).
I've got a couple more comments on admin UI in general, if you want to
take a bite at them.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
> That shouldn't be the case. Supporting X-Sendfile was I recall
> actually an after thought. The original intent was to be able to make
> use of mod_python req.sendfile() or WSGI wsgi.file_wrapper mechanisms.
Right; I think the idea shoul
2009/4/24 Jeremy Dunck :
> I'm not sure what this means. Inline order is defined by the
> underlying queryset, isn't it? What would reordering them on the
> client do in the DB?
This is a return of and a cleaning up of the old order_with_respect_to
(which still sorta works, but the admin featur
On Apr 25, 9:47 am, ccahoon wrote:
> Hello there django-dev, my name is Chris Cahoon. I'm a junior at the
> University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), heading towards a BS
> in CS. There's a good amount of auto-biography in my GSoC proposal, so
> I'll leave that for later. I was accepted
Hello there django-dev, my name is Chris Cahoon. I'm a junior at the
University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), heading towards a BS
in CS. There's a good amount of auto-biography in my GSoC proposal, so
I'll leave that for later. I was accepted to GSoC with Malcolm
Tredinnick as my mentor,
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Zain Memon wrote:
> > Hello,
> > As you might know, I'm one of the Django GSoC students this year. My
> mentor
> > is (the) Jacob Kaplan-Moss, and he's already started corrupting my
> innocent
> > mind.
> >
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Zain Memon wrote:
> Hello,
> As you might know, I'm one of the Django GSoC students this year. My mentor
> is (the) Jacob Kaplan-Moss, and he's already started corrupting my innocent
> mind.
> This summer, I'm implementing a collection of ideas with the goal to im
Hello,
As you might know, I'm one of the Django GSoC students this year. My mentor
is (the) Jacob Kaplan-Moss, and he's already started corrupting my innocent
mind.
This summer, I'm implementing a collection of ideas with the goal to improve
the general usability of the admin. The ideas are groupe
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> Yeah, that was a pretty lazy O(n^2) algorithm, the smart way to do it would
> be:
>
> if not hasattr(self, '_queryset_dict'):
> self._queryset_dict = dict([(o.pk, o) for o in self.queryset])
> pk = something
> kwargs['instance'] = self._qu
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>
>>
>> Note if we go with this approach (if I'm understanding it correctly) we
>> are slightly changing the way in which we expect model formsets to be used.
>> We currently document
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>>
>> Also, it would be nice if we could accomplish the lookup in one DB call
>>> rather than looking up each individual item in a
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>
> Also, it would be nice if we could accomplish the lookup in one DB call
>> rather than looking up each individual item in a separate query. Having a
>> model formset with hundreds of e
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>
> Note if we go with this approach (if I'm understanding it correctly) we are
> slightly changing the way in which we expect model formsets to be used. We
> currently document that the same QuerySet should be passed in during POST as
> GET:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Joseph Kocherhans > > wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>>>
I don't see how to solve the general problem at t
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Joseph Kocherhans
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I don't see how to solve the general problem at the framework level, but
>>> there may be some additional sanity
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't see how to solve the general problem at the framework level, but
>> there may be some additional sanity checks we could add to help out here.
>> For instance we cou
Forgot to include Django-Dev in this update, oops! (Sorry those who will get
it twice!)
Original Message:
Ok, so not showing the proposal is silly, below is the original, but we have
been restructuring the prioritization to maximize the awesomeness guaranteed
to be accomplished. I left the origin
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Karen Tracey wrote:
>
> I don't see how to solve the general problem at the framework level, but
> there may be some additional sanity checks we could add to help out here.
> For instance we could make the formset validation return False if the number
> of items i
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:24 AM, David Gouldin wrote:
>
> There's a more subtle way to introduce the same bug. You can order on
> a field that is not unique and run into the same issue: an undefined
> return order due to duplicate values on the order column.
>
This is true, and that could lead
And as first status update I give you the original proposal that got
accepted by the good folks at GSOC:
I would like to add hooks for validation on models and model fields so
that users could define their validation logic there. This will
include simple value validation (is_integer, is_email),
Hi folks,
just wanted to let you know that I'll be participating on Google
Summer of Code, improving Django i18n. I posted my original proposal
at
http://vaig.be/2009/04/gsoc-implementation-of-additional-i18n.html
but I'll review it after discussing some points. Any feedback will be
appreciate.
Thanks for the update. Here is what I have found. I ran the tests on python 2.4
and python 2.5. The error only seems to occur in python 2.6. Here is what I
found regarding this error
http://bugs.python.org/issue3210
When I ran the tests on python 2.4. I only got one error which is liste
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Ben Firshman wrote:
>
> On 24 Apr 2009, at 16:21, zellyn wrote:
>
> >
> > [I wasn't sure whether to post this before or after 1.1 dropped, but
> > decided to post now, since I'm just looking for discussion and
> > comments.]
> >
> > Django's contrib.syndication ap
On 24 Apr 2009, at 16:21, zellyn wrote:
>
> [I wasn't sure whether to post this before or after 1.1 dropped, but
> decided to post now, since I'm just looking for discussion and
> comments.]
>
> Django's contrib.syndication app feels different from normal views,
> using a dictionary and dispatchi
ok, thanks - I overlooked that IDE has in its preferences to always
report
UnboundLocalError exception, no to mention that is possible to ignore
this
location quickly - but it still seems to me as little waste annoyance
for 1.1
Petr
On 24 Dub, 17:52, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-04-
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 08:25 -0700, falken wrote:
> hi, should this be for a ticket?, sorry for twice post, but it
> prevents this fine ide to be used smoothly for beginners:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thread/thread/7289436c968d9c8b#
There's no bug there. Your propose
Hi everybody,
I have the pleasure of working on model validation (#6845) as my GSOC
project mentored by Joseph Kocherhans. I am very happy that I got the
opportunity to work on such an important part of Django as my GSOC
project.
I have already done some work on django and on the topic itself (s
hi, should this be for a ticket?, sorry for twice post, but it
prevents this fine ide to be used smoothly for beginners:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thread/thread/7289436c968d9c8b#
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
[I wasn't sure whether to post this before or after 1.1 dropped, but
decided to post now, since I'm just looking for discussion and
comments.]
Django's contrib.syndication app feels different from normal views,
using a dictionary and dispatching by slug, then finding objects by
splitting the rest
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:09 AM, David Gouldin wrote:
> Lest you criticize accessing all queryset items by index, Django is
> currently doing just that in
> django.forms.models.BaseModelFormSet._construct_form. This means that
> when creating an inline for a model without an order_by, Django can
There's a more subtle way to introduce the same bug. You can order on
a field that is not unique and run into the same issue: an undefined
return order due to duplicate values on the order column.
On Apr 24, 9:14 am, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:09 AM, David Gouldin wrote:
>
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:09 AM, David Gouldin wrote:
>
> I've run into a bit of an odd problem with the ORM. I have a model
> without an order_by in its Meta. When I create a queryset and iter
> through it, I get the items in a sensical fashion. However, when I
> access the the queryset item
I've run into a bit of an odd problem with the ORM. I have a model
without an order_by in its Meta. When I create a queryset and iter
through it, I get the items in a sensical fashion. However, when I
access the the queryset items by index (qs[0], qs[1], etc), not only
do I get the items back i
On Apr 24, 3:49 am, Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Ben Firshman wrote:
>
> > On 19 Apr 2009, at 11:42, mrts wrote:
>
> > > The feature is much needed, thanks for dealing with this!
>
> > > However, as for the API, I'd say coupling search to models is
> > > inadvisa
42 matches
Mail list logo
