On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Paul McMillan wrote:
>> There has been some discussion of unittest2 before on the list, and
>> there's a ticket about including it.
>> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12991
>>
>> We get a bunch of
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:06 AM, Paul McMillan wrote:
> There has been some discussion of unittest2 before on the list, and
> there's a ticket about including it.
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12991
>
> We get a bunch of useful features with unittest2, and everyone I've
> spoken with on #
This list is not for "how to" questions, please refer to
django-us...@googlegroups.com.
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Cheney Pang wrote:
> I need to go check out the related data of current data QuerySet and
> set these into the model objects as attribute in the way, I know this:
>
> for r
I need to go check out the related data of current data QuerySet and
set these into the model objects as attribute in the way, I know this:
for row in self.query.results_iter():
..
in iterator(self).but I can't do that,because it will lead to nested loops .
how to do that? thanks!
--
Back during one the last Chicago bash, I coded up a fix for Ticket 2594, which
would ensure template tags collapsed on themselves within the final source of a
rendered template.
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2594
Just wondering if anyone's looked at it, if it sucked, etc.
--
You receiv
On 14 June 2010 23:06, Paul McMillan wrote:
> 1) Include the unittest2 library along with the Django distribution as
> we have with simplejson. We can use the system's library if it exists,
> or import our bundled copy if it does not. This has the drawback of
> requiring us to keep that library cu
Since it wasn't readily apparent, I've been posting updates about my
progress to my personal blog. The updates can be found here:
http://thefire.us/archives/tag/gsoc2010
The short summary is that things are going slowly, but that I plan to
pick up the pace significantly.
I'll post notes to -dev f
There has been some discussion of unittest2 before on the list, and
there's a ticket about including it.
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12991
We get a bunch of useful features with unittest2, and everyone I've
spoken with on #django-dev agrees that it would be a useful thing to
get into core
Hello Horst! :)
Thank You for this patch. It was very helpful
On May 28, 6:20 pm, Horst Gutmann wrote:
> Did you already try the patch I attached
> athttp://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/13621? Perhaps this solves your
> problem too :-)
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Ludwik Trammer w
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Peter Bengtsson wrote:
> I'm happy to submit a ticket but wanted to check first that I'm doing
> the right thing. I think this used to work in Django 1.1 but not now
> in trunk.
>
> I can better explain it with code:
>
> [snip details]
> The point of this is that
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Hooshyar wrote:
> I am new to this group, although I am 4 years old with Django. I have
> a question. If this is not the right place, I apologize in advance.
> Please refer me to a proper mailing list. Please reply here or you can
> e-mail me directly, if you wish
Hello all,
I am new to this group, although I am 4 years old with Django. I have
a question. If this is not the right place, I apologize in advance.
Please refer me to a proper mailing list. Please reply here or you can
e-mail me directly, if you wish. my e-mail address is
hfn1...@yahoo.com
My qu
I'm happy to submit a ticket but wanted to check first that I'm doing
the right thing. I think this used to work in Django 1.1 but not now
in trunk.
I can better explain it with code:
# models.py
class FooBarModel(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=10)
age = models.IntegerF
On Jun 14, 3:38 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 9:18 PM, George Sakkis
> wrote:
> > I'm wondering what was the rationale for introducing a new separate
> > signal for m2m relationships, as opposed to using the existing ones on
> > the intermediate ('through') model.
>
>
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 9:18 PM, George Sakkis wrote:
> I'm wondering what was the rationale for introducing a new separate
> signal for m2m relationships, as opposed to using the existing ones on
> the intermediate ('through') model.
The normal model save/delete signals were disabled because of
I'm wondering what was the rationale for introducing a new separate
signal for m2m relationships, as opposed to using the existing ones on
the intermediate ('through') model. Currently the situations is
confusing:
* For m2m fields with auto_created intermediate model, calling
``Model.m2m_field.add
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 9:00 PM, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 14, 10:39 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
>> > Hello, Russell et al.
>>
>> Apologies for the delay in replying -- life has been a little hectic of late.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
On Jun 14, 10:39 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
> > Hello, Russell et al.
>
> Apologies for the delay in replying -- life has been a little hectic of late.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> > Unlocking the development server so that it could serve a WSGI
> >>
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
> Hello, Russell et al.
Apologies for the delay in replying -- life has been a little hectic of late.
>> > Unlocking the development server so that it could serve a WSGI
>> > application other than django.core.handlers.wsgi:WSGIHandler would b
Hello,
Not that I want to rush this, but have you had time to read my last
email or made a decision? :-)
Cheers,
- Gustavo.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegro
I ca say for certain its the wrong approach. Somewhere in the add_filter
call chain is a explicit_is (or something like that parameter). Something
like that (possibly that exactly) should be used here.
Alex
On Jun 14, 2010 2:21 AM, "Russell Keith-Magee"
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 2:45 PM,
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> Ticket #11521's patch has been sitting in my production server install
> for months now. I didn't have time to write a test for it (read: I
> don't currently have time to understand and get familiar with the test
> suite), so I would reall
22 matches
Mail list logo
