My apologies, Simon. This has been on my list of things to look at,
but people keep putting more things on top of that list :-)
I've had a cursory look at the patch, and it looks good. I'll need to
take a much closer look before I commit anything, but it certainly
looks to be on the right path. Th
If you glance at the revision log for the committers page in the docs,
there are actually a couple more ;-)
http://code.djangoproject.com/log/django/trunk/docs/internals/committers.txt
On Oct 8, 6:15 pm, Łukasz Rekucki wrote:
> I just noticed we have 2 new Core Developers: Alex Gaynor and Andrew
Great!
2010/10/9 Łukasz Rekucki
> I just noticed we have 2 new Core Developers: Alex Gaynor and Andrew
> Godwin and a new Admin Specialist Simon Meers.
>
> Just wanted to say: Congratulations guys and keep up the good work! :)
>
> --
> Łukasz Rekucki
>
> --
> You received this message because yo
I just noticed we have 2 new Core Developers: Alex Gaynor and Andrew
Godwin and a new Admin Specialist Simon Meers.
Just wanted to say: Congratulations guys and keep up the good work! :)
--
Łukasz Rekucki
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django dev
I just want to summarize the password handling changes before and
after this patch.
before:
- create_user() with empty password or None -> password set to '!'
unusable
- set_password() accepts everything
- has_usable_password() returning False for password equal to '!'
after:
- create_user() with
Thanks for your feedback. I attached a new patch with the following
changes:
* allow empty string in set_password()
* has_usable_password() returns false if password is '!' or None
* add unit test set_password(None)
* add verbosity option to createsuperuser command + unit test
* output msg to stdo
Anyone? I know it is a relatively complex patch to review, but it would be a
shame to see such a frequently requested feature/fix miss the 1.3 boat.
On 29 August 2010 08:06, Simon Meers wrote:
> A gentle reminder to anyone who would like to review the recent patch
> uploaded for #3400 [1].
>
> I
Thanks :-)
2010/10/8 Alex Gaynor :
> Yes, and yes. :)
>
> Alex
>
> 2010/10/8 Filip Gruszczyński :
>> I am not sure, but I think I have seen it mentioned somewhere, so I
>> would like to ask: are tests django being migrated from doctests to
>> unit tests and is it desirable to provide patches with
Yes, and yes. :)
Alex
2010/10/8 Filip Gruszczyński :
> I am not sure, but I think I have seen it mentioned somewhere, so I
> would like to ask: are tests django being migrated from doctests to
> unit tests and is it desirable to provide patches with such migration?
>
> --
> Filip Gruszczyński
>
>
I am not sure, but I think I have seen it mentioned somewhere, so I
would like to ask: are tests django being migrated from doctests to
unit tests and is it desirable to provide patches with such migration?
--
Filip Gruszczyński
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goo
Hi guys, how are you?
I had problems with DecimalField and localize input/output. I found
the bug and I'm working on it:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/14101
While I digging to find the bug, I see that the DecimalField (and even
the Field class) uses a "localize" attribute. I think this lo
Hi all,
This is a final call for comment on #12991, the introduction of
unittest2. Barring objection, my intention is to commit this on
Monday.
I've now had confirmation that the suite passes under GIS, and a
couple more reports of successful test passes under different Python
versions and databa
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
...
> Also, are there any API-level discrepancies remaining that need to be
> considered? The earlier django-dev thread suggests that there are some
> problems with get_multi(), but it also says that they've been fixed.
> Is this the case?
On 8 loka, 10:41, Hanne Moa wrote:
> You can't necessarily do this with a legacy database, as other systems
> also using that database expect the existing names.
alter sequence owned by does not change the sequnce name, just what
pg_get_serial_sequence will return for given table, column
combi
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:30 PM, George Sakkis wrote:
> There are at least three open tickets related to OneToOneFields
> (#10227, #14043, #14368) that, even if deemed invalid, hint at lack of
> adequate documentation. After reading the docs on OneToOneField, I
> don't think one can easily answer t
On 7 October 2010 19:14, akaariai wrote:
> Django doesn't expect the sequence name to be tablename_columname_seq,
> at least not in trunk. The last_insert_id method in backends/
> postgresql/operations.py uses select
> currval(pg_get_serial_sequence(tablename, columname)).
> pg_get_serial_sequence
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Jacob Burch wrote:
> Bringing this back for more design decision discussion. I've started a
> (very basic) wiki page with a brief summation of the situation here:
> http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/PylibmcSupport
>
> Of note from that wiki page are three main iss
17 matches
Mail list logo
