May I ask why you don't simply extend the models save method or use a
post save signal
(http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/signals/#django.db.models.signals.post_save)?
Do you really want the cleanups only if the object is saved via the
admin or whenever it is saved - for example in your
Thanks for clearing this up for me. I just "remembered" (or imagined ...
or dreamed) that the 1.0 documentation label came pretty quick after the
initial release, so I assumed that was the preferred way.
Marc
Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 10:45 +0200, Marc
Hi,
browsing the online docs, I stumbled over two minor issues:
The online documentation under http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/ still
redirects to http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/, which should be
.../1.1/ I suppose. The index page also still tells "This document is
for Django's SVN rel
Hi all,
it seems I've stumbled over one more tiny bug in trunk. As I read the
official documentation, the Django core should always use the
model._default_manager attribute instead of the hard coded model.objects.
If that is the case, then we've missed one in the dumpdata management
command.
It was just an idea. I'm not the person repeatedly writing the "not now
but soon"-mails. You and the other devs have to decide, which way you
save the most of your (currently very precious and limited) time. It
would really make no sense to create additional documentation structure,
that is no
Hi all,
I've read that kind of answer to feature proposals quite often during
the last weeks. Maybe we should create an informal trac-wiki page
collecting all those good ideas and explaining why this is currently
necessary. That way the devs won't have to search through the old
mailings after
