>
> But I read Andrew's comment differently: it's maybe not the 60 characters,
> but some sort of "aggregation" we could be looking for. So maybe instead of
> "0026_remove_book_title_add_book_description" we could have
> "0026_book_add_remove" - especially when multiple fields were involved.
I fe
Hey Markus,
In fact, when I had to implement that in one of my projects, I realized
that Django has already most tools needed to (in my opinion) properly
handle those tokens. And indeed, this only covers HS256-type of JWTs, for
any other type, we would recommend using a third-party package (see
hello,
i was wondering if there was any work done/planned/discussed about
implementing support for this really useful feature of libpq:
$ psql
'postgres://host1:5432,host2:5432,host3:5432/postgres?target_session_attrs=read-write'
Psycopg claims to support all dsn parameters.
https://paquier.x
Nice work, Claude!
However, dealing with JWTs, and especially verifying them is notoriously hard
and fragile. Frankly, I think I'd rather see smaller libraries do one job and
do it well, than having Django implement an incomplete JWT spec. As far as I
can tell, only HS256 signing/verification i
Nah, I'm good — but thank you!
On Friday, April 24, 2020 at 8:57:09 AM UTC-4, René Fleschenberg wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/23/20 12:20 PM, Adam Johnson wrote:
> > What version of Python René?
>
> I tested with 3.6.7. I can test with other versions, if that helps.
>
> Regards,
> René
>
>
>
> --
Hi,
On 4/23/20 12:20 PM, Adam Johnson wrote:
> What version of Python René?
I tested with 3.6.7. I can test with other versions, if that helps.
Regards,
René
--
René Fleschenberg
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contribution
I'm also -1 on removing the form field for the same reasons as Adam.
Le vendredi 24 avril 2020 06:39:06 UTC-4, Mariusz Felisiak a écrit :
>
> `models.NullBooleanField` is now deprecated [1].
>
> I would like to ask again about opinions on deprecating `forms.
> NullBooleanField` because I'm not con
I'm -1 on deprecating the form field. The different widgets make sense.
Forms are decoupled from models for reasons like this.
On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 11:39, Mariusz Felisiak
wrote:
> `models.NullBooleanField` is now deprecated [1].
>
> I would like to ask again about opinions on deprecating `for
`models.NullBooleanField` is now deprecated [1].
I would like to ask again about opinions on deprecating `forms.
NullBooleanField` because I'm not convinced that it's necessary and
expected. `forms.NullBooleanField` and `forms.BooleanField` use different
widgets and their behavior is slightly di
I agree with Mariusz on the ticket/PR that my answer alone isn't enough
impetus to make this change. Hopefully someone more involved in i18n can
weigh in.
Although it changes the order of operations, I think this still works to
achieve the same behaviour. This snippet can be run at the end of a pa
I too am in favour of this change.
But I read Andrew's comment differently: it's maybe not the 60
characters, but some sort of "aggregation" we could be looking for. So
maybe instead of "0026_remove_book_title_add_book_description" we could
have "0026_book_add_remove" - especially when multipl
11 matches
Mail list logo
