Thanks for clarifying that Mark. I've updated the ticket mentioning that
we'll leave the resolution of the index name collision issue to your DEP.
On Monday, 1 December 2014 22:35:49 UTC, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>
> I intend the new indexes to have customisable names, and to deconstruct
> their name
I intend the new indexes to have customisable names, and to deconstruct
their name into the migration. This means that any changes in the name (if
the name is autogenerated) would be detected. It should be possible to do
renames.
It is worth noting that mysql (and sqlite obviously) do not support
Hi Peter,
I am not sure if you are the original poster on that thread, but I think
you'll get a better response here if you have a proposal for solving the
problem that we can evaluate or a particular design decision question you
are trying to get answered. Just asking us to look at that thread
This thread was started in django-users, but commented that it should be
moved to developers list instead.
Take a look at the original thread
here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/django-users/F0J6fKP1un8
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Dj
Hey folks,
I don't like the idea of expected failures either.
Given the fact that at one point user defined indexes are going to be
introduced, I would consider to delay this issue for now until the DEP has
been accepted and is (being) implemented. At that point we know what the
underlying API
I'm not in favor of merging expectedFailure tests:
* It adds the overhead of time running tests that we know aren't expected
to work.
* It's more code to maintain (might go stale in the meantime anyway).
* An issue might be obsoleted (via deprecation, etc.) at some point.
* When viewing commit his
It's worth flagging up that part of what makes WhiteNoise good for serving
static files in production also makes it not quite as good for using in
development.
Most file servers work by taking the requested URL, constructing a local
path from it, and then checking whether a file exists at that
On 11/30/2014 05:54 AM, tomv wrote:
> It's important to note that right now, index names are not re-creatable in
> retrospect. They rely on the names of models and fields, that are free to
> be renamed. So a complete rethink will be needed if introspection can no
> longer be used for user-specif
Hi Yann,
The policy we use for backporting is described there:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/internals/release-process/#supported-versions
> The rule of thumb is that fixes will be backported to the last major
release for bugs that would have prevented a release in the first place
(r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I have an issue which is corrected in master but not in the 1.7.x
branch and I would like to know what I should do ?
The commit fixing my issue is
https://github.com/django/django/commit/45e049937d2564d11035827ca9a9221b86215e45#diff-70af885c27
10 matches
Mail list logo
