Re: URL dispatcher fallthrough?

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 10:28 PM, meric wrote: > > Michael: How does the middleware work with other URLs that do not need to > have fallthrough? Do you have to add them to excluded_path_patterns? > Would like a more general description of how it works. > A ContentMiddleware behaves basically the

Re: URL dispatcher fallthrough?

In this mailing list alone, Michael, Tom, David, Felipe, julianb, Ian and I have all proposed different solutions. 7 different solutions to what appears to be a very common problem. :( Tom: As you said the get_instance_or_404 only works for simple cases. The switcher view only works if the de

[ANN] Django 1.5.1 released

Hi folks -- We've just released Django 1.5.1, a bug fix release that cleans up a couple issues with last month's 1.5 release. The biggest fix is for a memory leak introduced in Django 1.5. Under certain circumstances, repeated iteration over querysets could leak memory - sometimes quite a bit of

Re: Policy for stable/1.x.x branches

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > Will bugs like that one I mentioned in the OP actually be eventually fixed > in 1.5.1, instead? No, it's not a critical fix, so the fix'll be in 1.6. Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django d

Re: Policy for stable/1.x.x branches

@Jacob - thank you much. That was the exact docs page I didn't think existed. @Ramiro - I meant using stable/1.5.x in production. BTW, Jacob, the first of 2 docs links you provided mentioned providing bug fixes for the most recent release, and follows up with essentially, "they're at stable/A.B

Re: Policy for stable/1.x.x branches

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > The commit > https://github.com/django/django/commit/2f121dfe635b3f497fe1fe03bc8eb97cdf5083b3 > fixed a problem where a custom regex validator's customized message was > ignored, in favor of the one set on the class (you just see "Please enter a >

Re: Policy for stable/1.x.x branches

See https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/git/#other-branches and also https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/release-process/#bug-fix-releases The short version is that stable/* branches only receive "critical" backports: security fixes, crashers/data-loss bugs, and occasional

Policy for stable/1.x.x branches

The commit https://github.com/django/django/commit/2f121dfe635b3f497fe1fe03bc8eb97cdf5083b3 fixed a problem where a custom regex validator's customized message was ignored, in favor of the one set on the class (you just see "Please enter a valid value"). If I pip install the latest master, th

Re: [contrib][admin]: Grouping actions

On Thursday, March 28, 2013 1:50:36 PM UTC+1, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > > > On 28 mars 2013, at 12:21, Stan > > wrote: > > > Do you guys think it worth the effort to backport the functionality into > admin ? > > > Hi Stan, > > I like this idea. > > In terms of API, is there a particular rea

Re: why does django.db.signals map to django.core.signals

Hey Jeremy, Russ, I've created the working signal now. I have no issue moving the signal to the django.db.models.signals. However, I never planed on sending the models set to be created. I felt that would be an apparent miss direction of the interface. The developer would assume that they'll get

Re: URL dispatcher fallthrough?

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Loic Bistuer wrote: > What I would like to see: > > urlpatterns = patterns('', > # Standard patterns > url(r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)), > > # Fallthrough patterns > url('', include('myapp.urls'), > url('', include(

Re: URL dispatcher fallthrough?

I'm with Tom here, this just feels wrong. The whole point of urls.py is to have a clean mapping of URLs to views. Of course I understand your problem, so let's look at the details. > // # front page for country > // / # list of schools and companies with activities > in that industry, in that co

Re: [contrib][admin]: Grouping actions

On 28 mars 2013, at 12:21, Stan wrote: > Do you guys think it worth the effort to backport the functionality into > admin ? Hi Stan, I like this idea. In terms of API, is there a particular reason why you chose to add an attribute to the actions themselves? I'd prefer to support a nested s

Re: URL dispatcher fallthrough?

> urlpatterns = patterns('', > (r'/([^/]+)/$', Switcher.as_view(delegates=[...])), > (r'/([^/]+)/([^/]+)/$', Switcher.as_view(delegates=[...])), > (r'/([^/]+)/([^/]+)/([^/]+)/$', Switcher.as_view(delegates=[...])) > ) I don't see this as an improvement because you s

[contrib][admin]: Grouping actions

Hi, In several projects we have some front-ends that share code with admin. One addition in the front is the ability to group actions in several groups for the s

Re: URL dispatcher fallthrough?

> > What is the reasonable alternative? The only way I can think how a > wrapping view will be able to handle this case, is to write your own > router... > ...In each case you'll have lots of ifs, try..excepts, for each model, and > then to appropriate view. For the second and third router_v

Re: ATOMIC_REQUESTS, cache invalidation and concurrent process

On 28 mars 2013, at 03:04, Ivan wrote: > With ATOMIC_REQUESTS, after cache invalidation, the concurrent process can > re-create cache old data, between deleting of cache and commit. If I understand correctly, you're describing the following scenario. It assumes you have two concurrent process,