On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 11:54 PM, burc...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Hi Russell,
>>
>> I strongly disagree with your and Adrian vision of whether conventions
>> are good or not.
>> But I won't comment that any further. There are your political
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 11:54 PM, burc...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> I strongly disagree with your and Adrian vision of whether conventions
> are good or not.
> But I won't comment that any further. There are your political
> decisions, and I have no single bit of control on them.
> I know
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:54 PM, burc...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> I strongly disagree with your and Adrian vision of whether conventions
> are good or not.
> But I won't comment that any further. There are your political
> decisions, and I have no single bit of control on them.
> I know t
Hi Russell,
I strongly disagree with your and Adrian vision of whether conventions
are good or not.
But I won't comment that any further. There are your political
decisions, and I have no single bit of control on them.
I know that it's impossible to persuade you, so why should I spend my
time doin
> >> 7. Requests in forms
>
> >> I suspect the answer on this one will be no for the simple reason of
> >> backwards compatibility. A request attribute is only really useful if
> >> it is ubiquitous, and there's no way to make it ubiquitous without
> >> breaking backwards compatibility. Truth be to
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM, burc...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> My writing style sometimes is really clumsy. I'm sorry about that.
>
> You might look at the end of the first message in the thread.
> Or maybe the thread topic.
>
> The problem is that half of third party plugins write: "a
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:32 PM, petr.marhoun wrote:
> On Jun 3, 2:57 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 7:41 PM, petr.marhoun wrote:
>> > Hello,
>>
>> > I would like to propose some improvements for django.forms. But it is
>> > seven quite independent proposals - one mai
On 4 jun, 12:10, Roald wrote:
> On 3 jun, 19:33, Luke Plant wrote:
> > On Thursday 03 June 2010 08:59:31 Roald wrote:
> > > > One reason against this is it makes it harder to re-use other
> > > > views from within the View.
> > > I don't really understand what you mean. Do you mean re-using
> > >
On 3 jun, 19:33, Luke Plant wrote:
> On Thursday 03 June 2010 08:59:31 Roald wrote:
> > > One reason against this is it makes it harder to re-use other
> > > views from within the View.
> > I don't really understand what you mean. Do you mean re-using
> > 'good' old function-views?
> Yes, or new o
I think it is best that each application has its own configuration files.
The problem is usually the opposite, how to use a pluggable application
without changing the source code. And that is why usually the application
writes the global settings.
I'm using this snippet of code in order to separa
Hi Russell,
My writing style sometimes is really clumsy. I'm sorry about that.
You might look at the end of the first message in the thread.
Or maybe the thread topic.
The problem is that half of third party plugins write: "after install,
add this and this and this to settings.py".
The problem i
11 matches
Mail list logo
