On 10/16/2012 04:00 AM, Łukasz Rekucki wrote:
> If we include some form of a test runner in every localflvour, I
> suspect they will get out of sync quite quickly. Also, I don't think
> there is a good reason for duplicating code.
David's pull request seems pretty minimal to me - just a three-line
This seems like the most reasonable approach. FWIW, why not name it just
django-localflavor?
Cheers,
AT
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Łukasz Rekucki wrote:
> Maybe we need something like django-localflavour-commons, which would
> include the test harness, packaging logic (then in setup.py y
Please. As Jacob has already made clear, this thread isn't helping move
anything forward.
Can we please respect his request and move on.
Django's community is absolutely interested in addressing practical steps
towards improving performance and would no doubt welcome specific work
towards prof
static[0]
138017 function calls in 0.818 seconds
Ordered by: internal time
List reduced from 79 to 10 due to restriction <10>
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
10000.0620.0000.4900.000 base.py:72(get_response)
2000
another one:
http://mindref.blogspot.com/2012/10/python-web-reverse-urls-benchmark.html
On Thursday, October 4, 2012 10:50:35 AM UTC+3, Moonlight wrote:
>
> I found the following benchmarks recently:
> 1. http://mindref.blogspot.com/2012/09/python-fastest-web-framework.html
> 2. http://mindref.b
On 16 October 2012 11:21, David Winterbottom
wrote:
> Here's another pull request for setting up testing, this time using tox as
> per Russell's suggestion.
> https://github.com/django/django-localflavor-gb/pull/2
>
> AFAIK, tox requires the tests to be part of the package. Hence I moved
> tests.
Here's another pull request for setting up testing, this time using tox as
per Russell's suggestion.
https://github.com/django/django-localflavor-gb/pull/2
AFAIK, tox requires the tests to be part of the package. Hence I moved
tests.py into the django_localflavor_gb package as well as a test sett
