e research seems to suggest all (most?) of
> the major backends support it.
>
> --
> C
>
>
> On 9 February 2015 at 11:26, Bob Remeika
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm new to django and python in general but I've been a programmer for a
>&
ty.
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10088
Can anybody tell me what the status is on this? Looks like it's wide open
and a patch would be welcome assuming that it's not utter crap :)
Thanks,
Bob
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
These exist for 1.3, 1.3.1, 1.2..., but not 1.4.
Are they located somewhere else moving forward?
Thanks
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django
developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscri
d990e/f0c072cd47dc5ce4)
Is anyone interested? If so, I could cleanup the patch and write some
doc/tests to submit it for integration in django?
Cheers,
Bob
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send
hijacking" attack than CSRF. It would be nice
if there was a way for Django to automatically avoid this as well
(maybe another middleware that does not allow returning a content type
of 'application/json' if request.is_ajax() is false?)
On Mar 19, 4:59 pm, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Bob Thomas wrote:
> > Digging through the (huge) 1.1 milestone list a bit, the following
> > seem to be closer to improvements than bugs (IMO). If you have any
> > favorites in here, they shou
This has been discussed extensively, both on this list and the ticket
at http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3011
It's been rejected for 1.1 (now is not really a good time to be
proposing features), but you can try mentioning this again when 1.2
planning starts.
and unofficial; I'm not a committer)
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe
On Mar 19, 3:42 pm, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Bob Thomas wrote:
> > So, if the template tag wasn't hard enough to write, it's not helpful?
>
> Um. That's not what I read from what Luke's saying.
>
That's what I read,
it's done
"properly". Why should it be the default now, if you have plans to
significantly change how it works in the near future? If I had a
commit-bit vote, I would be -1 on doing this now, and +1 on adding it
once the rest of the planned improvements go in.
-bob
--~--~---
; plus simplejson but alas the shallow copy again.
>
You may want to look at http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/4656
instead, since I think that patch does what you're looking for.
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are su
sting tests for CSRF), but I think your initial concerns
about the patch have been addressed.
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send em
,
once 1.1 goes out, we're stuck with it.
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubs
There are 3 outstanding tickets for FormPreview that add functionality
that exists in FormWizard. Unfortunately, patches for two of them are
backwards-incompatible changes. Both of the backwards-incompatible
tickers are marked "design decision needed", so . . . here I am,
looking for a decision!
older for it to
work.
-bob
On Jan 5, 12:17 pm, Luke Plant wrote:
> I wrote:
> > If you want to implement any of this, I'm not planning on working
> > on it for this next week, I'll get in touch when I start in case
> > you've made some progress.
>
> I'
be disabled if someone wants to use the
template tag. This is an area where Django can easily be secure by
default, as long as we add the flexibility for the users who need more
control.
-bob
PS - Don't really want to hijack this, but you seem to be the only one
currently
much work with i18n/
l18n)? Did I miss a situation where someone could still get stuck not
being able to easily use the desired format?
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" gro
oup/django-developers/browse_thread/
thread/3fc2d329a2fafe3f/d47ca3f0e40eb8f0
[2]http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9356
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To p
;t know if they were unintentionally lost or intentionally
rejected:
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Version1.1Features?version=101
Also, I added my votes here:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pIaJn09D1vqW1yJjl3wGUeg
(not sure if you're counting non-committer votes or not)
Thanks.
Trac, not the mailing
list.
-bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group,
Ok, re-sent :)
Of course, this just highlights why it's important to have a policy
for acknowledging receipt of a security vuln. If I knew I should
expect a reply regardless, I probably would have re-sent this a week
ago.
-bob
On Oct 7, 2:30 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL
ind (or think
I've found). And that's not really good for anyone.
--
Bob Thomas
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-de
ise it doesn't really look
like a candidate to me.
> I think we ought to call the release 2.0.
That would be fun, though the Ubuntu convention would certainly
sidestep cries of "foul!".
Bob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
23 matches
Mail list logo
