The first alpha preview package for Django 1.3 is now available.
* Release notes: http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/1.3-alpha-1/
* Download instructions: http://www.djangoproject.com/download/
--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct."
--
You
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Paul McMillan wrote:
> In general, it would be helpful to have an auto-responder on that
> address (so we know our reports didn't end up in a spambox), and a
> more specific timeframe for expected response noted on the website.
> It's great to have the list, but i
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
> Yes, here are the settings I'm using:
>
> DATABASES = {
> 'default': {
> 'ENGINE': 'django.db.backends.oracle',
> 'NAME': 'xe',
> 'USER': 'ikelly',
> 'PASSWORD': 'ikelly',
> 'OPTIONS': {'threaded': T
I just ran into this same issue, but it wasn't Django, the answer
lived in nginx.conf
try checking the
client_max_body_size M;
in your server{
On Nov 10, 9:42 am, john <185...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm working on a Django project. I'm running on cloudservers hosting,
> with nginx/uwsgi a
In general, it would be helpful to have an auto-responder on that
address (so we know our reports didn't end up in a spambox), and a
more specific timeframe for expected response noted on the website.
It's great to have the list, but if a response really is going to take
a week, it would be helpful
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote:
> So, I've been trying to trace a bug that's been affecting me as well as
> someone else I know, to do with ModelForms / the admin and CharFields
> with null=True, blank=True, and unique=True
>
> The old ticket for this was closed as WONTFIX:
My company uses the nginx + uwsgi combination extensively (well, so far it's
the stack serving Django on 6-ish servers) and haven't ever had this particular
problem. For reference, here's our (stock) uwsgi_params file:
uwsgi_param QUERY_STRING $query_string;
uwsgi_param REQUEST_METHOD
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:02 PM, Ramiro Morales wrote:
> Has anybody had success with this setup i.e. one where the 'default and
> 'other'
> alias pointing to such an Oracle product/install?. Is it possible at all?
>
> If so, could you please share the relevant Django settings file (not
> really,
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Jeff Enderwick
wrote:
> Hi, is anyone working on making the auth middleware friendly for
> multi-tenent systems?
> For example, username not being unique, but tenant+username being
> unique instead?
> I just thought I would check before diving in...
I'm not aware
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 11:42 PM, john <185...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm working on a Django project. I'm running on cloudservers hosting,
> with nginx/uwsgi as the server. I'm trying to get an image upload form
> working with POST, but I'm running into some problems.
>
> Basically, it com
So, I've been trying to trace a bug that's been affecting me as well as
someone else I know, to do with ModelForms / the admin and CharFields
with null=True, blank=True, and unique=True
The old ticket for this was closed as WONTFIX:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9590
However, I'd personall
I apologize for the unintentional insult. In retrospect "silly" was a
poor choice of words, and certainly not directed at you specifically,
Jannis. Your opinion is plenty valid, even if we disagree.
The real crux of my argument is this: Django's philosophy of keeping
programming concerns out of te
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Stephen Kelly
> wrote:
>> Can someone confirm that the email I sent yesterday made it through? Last
>> time I emailed that list it was marked as spam apparently.
>
> Yes, we've got it. We'll get back to you shortly - sorry for the delay
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Can someone confirm that the email I sent yesterday made it through? Last
> time I emailed that list it was marked as spam apparently.
Yes, we've got it. We'll get back to you shortly - sorry for the delay.
Jacob
--
You received this mess
Hi,
Can someone confirm that the email I sent yesterday made it through? Last
time I emailed that list it was marked as spam apparently.
All the best,
Steve.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send em
Hi, is anyone working on making the auth middleware friendly for
multi-tenent systems?
For example, username not being unique, but tenant+username being
unique instead?
I just thought I would check before diving in...
thanks,
Jeff
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Go
Hello,
I'm working on a Django project. I'm running on cloudservers hosting,
with nginx/uwsgi as the server. I'm trying to get an image upload form
working with POST, but I'm running into some problems.
Basically, it comes down to this: if I comment out this line:
uwsgi_param CONTENT_TYPE
On 10.11.2010, at 11:09, Luke Plant wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 16:59 -0700, SmileyChris wrote:
>> On Oct 29, 2:22 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
>> wrote:
>>> If we can introduce the terse syntax while maintaining the old syntax
>>> (including the analogous change in blocktrans), I think it would b
> Reading over the discussion, I'm in the same camp as Luke. I can see
> the use case, but I see a bunch of sharp edges that will end up biting
> the user in unexpected ways.
Thanks for dropping by :-) I think I've managed to remove the sharp edges.
The main problem in this thread is that the def
On 10.11.2010, at 09:20, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
> In a fit of coincidental timing, I was just being frustrated by this
> very issue with inclusion tags today. I'm +1 on supporting kwargs with
> "=". It is in fact *more* familiar to someone who works with HTML to
> be able to assign attributes in ar
On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 16:59 -0700, SmileyChris wrote:
> On Oct 29, 2:22 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
> > If we can introduce the terse syntax while maintaining the old syntax
> > (including the analogous change in blocktrans), I think it would be a
> > worthwhile change. However, I certainly
_/-o_ \o/
On Nov 9, 5:59 pm, Carl Meyer wrote:
> This is committed as r14507:http://code.djangoproject.com/changeset/14507
>
> Carl
--
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...@goo
In a fit of coincidental timing, I was just being frustrated by this
very issue with inclusion tags today. I'm +1 on supporting kwargs with
"=". It is in fact *more* familiar to someone who works with HTML to
be able to assign attributes in arbitrary order, for example:
http://example.com"; class=
23 matches
Mail list logo
