+1
I like this implementation.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/eKXUlc0TKgYJ.
To post to this group, send email to django-develope
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On 09/27/2012 04:47 PM, Dan Loewenherz wrote:
> > Just updated the ticket.
> >
> > As I commented, the heuristic for checking if a file has been modified
> > lies in line 282 of collectstatic.py:
> >
> > *if not prefixed_path in sel
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> Have I missed part of the discussion here? At DjangoCon, South was
>> still going to exist (as the "smarts" part of the problem) -- has this
>> changed?
>
> Obviously nothi
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> Have I missed part of the discussion here? At DjangoCon, South was
> still going to exist (as the "smarts" part of the problem) -- has this
> changed?
Obviously nothing's really decided, but I've been asking Andrew to
push for getting
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote:
> So, the patch [1] is looking alright, but after some consideration I think
> it's going to be best to leave this until just after the 1.5 branch has
> happened and then merge it in as part of the 1.6 cycle.
>
> My reasoning is thus:
>
> - Th
Hi Dan,
On 09/27/2012 04:47 PM, Dan Loewenherz wrote:
> Just updated the ticket.
>
> As I commented, the heuristic for checking if a file has been modified
> lies in line 282 of collectstatic.py:
>
> *if not prefixed_path in self.copied_files:*
> *
> return self.log("Skipping '%s' (already copie
Just updated the ticket.
As I commented, the heuristic for checking if a file has been modified lies
in line 282 of collectstatic.py:
*if not prefixed_path in self.copied_files:*
*
return self.log("Skipping '%s' (already copied earlier)" % path)
*
https://github.com/django/django/blob/master/dja
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Dan Loewenherz wrote:
> The problem I've run into is that collectstatic copies all files,
> regardless of whether they already exist on the destination.
No, as noted in the ticket, which has been closed needsinfo, staticfiles
already only copies modified files.
Good idea, but shouldn't it be a per-storage thing? Perhaps this could be
done with a couple of callbacks in the collectstatic run:
- Before collectstatic starts, so the storage backend can pick up its
inventory from the remote
- One called for each file that would be copied, and that c
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Dan Loewenherz wrote:
> Hey all!
>
> This is a feature request / proposal (one which I'm willing to build out,
> given that I've already developed a solution for my own uploader).
>
> [...]
>
> I'll contribute the patch. I know there is not a lot of time before the
Hi all,
On Sunday 23 September 2012 15:05:21 Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
>
> Doing final polish for Ian's patch and providing benchmark results for it
> will get this patch closer to commit.
>
I made some initial benchmarks, and they do not reflect the change I've seen in
the actual application. I
I like this feature and have recently been thinking of implementing
such on my own myself.
+1 for the feature request.
On 9/27/12, Dan Loewenherz wrote:
> Hey all!
>
> This is a feature request / proposal (one which I'm willing to build out,
> given that I've already developed a solution for my o
So a number of issues have come up in the review of this feature that I'd
like to summarize here.
The first boils down to feature basically being another case of an:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-relational_impedance_mismatch
That is, the idea of a lookup matching against an instance in m
Hey all!
This is a feature request / proposal (one which I'm willing to build out,
given that I've already developed a solution for my own uploader).
I run a consulting business that helps small startups build initial MVPs.
When the time ultimately comes to deciding how to store static assets, my
So, the patch [1] is looking alright, but after some consideration I think
it's going to be best to leave this until just after the 1.5 branch has
happened and then merge it in as part of the 1.6 cycle.
My reasoning is thus:
- The whole point of getting something into 1.5 was so I could build
mi
I added a patch to https://github.com/django/django/pull/399 -- Let me know
what you think, if I don't get any negative feedback I'll commit it before
the feature freeze.
Cheers,
Florian
On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4:00:48 PM UTC+2, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>
> Hi Benoit,
>
> as a matter of
16 matches
Mail list logo
