models.fields.Field default value rational

Hi all, I came across a behaviour that somewhat surprised me on the model fields. Namely, if you have a Field with no default value, an empty value for that field is likely to be turned into the empty string by Field.get_default. I came across this behaviour writing unit tests for an applicatioi

Re: [gsoc2009-testing] Windmill Runners Kicking it up a Notch

I'm really pleased to see coverage.py being used this way, thanks for doing the work. But I would strongly recommend starting coverage before importing the modules to avoid this effect of module-level statements not being measured. You can add exclude regexes to mitigate the problem, but it's

subfieldbase not in django core fields

Why does subclassing model field requirement[1] for custom fields is not applied to django core fields? [1] http://tinyurl.com/l2lvbx Any Django field classes has SubfieldBase metaclass declared, so for an "initial" DateField attribute: >>> ob = MyModel.objects.create(type=1,initial='2009-01-01

[GSOC] Multi-DB Update

Hey all, This past week unfortunately wasn't super eventful. I did some final dead code elimination on my m2m-refactor branch, I was able to kill about 150 additional lines of code that no longer needed, there are a few small changes I need to make to remove some quadratic behavior that occurs du

Re: [gsoc2009-testing] Windmill Runners Kicking it up a Notch

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Russell Keith-Magee < freakboy3...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Kevin Kubasik wrote: > > Should windmill tests default to non-isolated/non-transactional DB > behavior? > > Basically, we are providing the means for functional tests, these

Re: [gsoc2009-testing] Windmill Runners Kicking it up a Notch

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Kevin Kubasik wrote: > Should windmill tests default to non-isolated/non-transactional DB behavior? > Basically, we are providing the means for functional tests, these should be > tests like 'Register and Complete a Profile', then 'Edit Profile'. We don't > want th

Re: Creating "Read-only" automated form views

Hi Ian, I am interested. I think this should be listed as feature request, if this list gets opened for django 1.2. Thomas IanSR schrieb: > Django's automated form renderers form.as_table, form.as_p and > form.as_ul are great. We have a recurring situation where we'd like > the equivalent o

Re: [New Feature In Admin] Added Edit-Icon in selection widget of ForeignKey and ManyToMany Fields(Relationship fields).

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Dharmesh Patel wrote: > Hello! > > I added a new feature to edit selected item in selection widget of > relationship fields like a FireignKey and ManyToMany fields. > > You can see SVN diff file here : http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/11397 Hi Dharmesh Thank

[New Feature In Admin] Added Edit-Icon in selection widget of ForeignKey and ManyToMany Fields(Relationship fields).

Hello! I added a new feature to edit selected item in selection widget of relationship fields like a FireignKey and ManyToMany fields. You can see SVN diff file here : http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/11397 -- Best Regards, Dharmesh Patel Sr. Application Engineer. --~--~-~--~~-

[ANN] First Indian Python conference

Hi, We would love to have droves of django developers and users with us: http://in.pycon.org/2009/ -- regards kg http://lawgon.livejournal.com --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" gr