Karen,
Can you try changing line 230 of django.db.models.sql.query from:
row = row[:aggregate_start] + tuple(
to
row = tuple(row[:aggregate_start]) + tuple(
That should clear up most of the errors and seems to be the result of
Oracle returning a list inste
I'd vote in favor of number 1. While I'd love to have number 4, it's
simply not possible, as we discovered when looking at aggregates, not
even all versions of SQLite play nice together(yay whatever the hell
version I have!). If someone wants to do something like develop on
SQLite and then switc
Wow, sounds like you've taken a huge amount of work under your belt
(including naming only() and defer() :) ), thanks for all the hard
work! Can you give me a sense of what your solution for admin-urls
looks like, I just refreshed the patch on the ticket today, and the
last change I made(adding a
Ok, but you're original concern was that what happens if say you go to
send an email and "raises the issue that e-mail may take a while (i.e.
from a few seconds to a couple of minutes) to send;", ultimately if
you join on that thread than you've reduce the overhead insofar as the
new length of the
I don't follow the argument against simply having the signal spawn a
thread. Why does the main thread ever need to regain control of it,
if the signal sender needs the response than ultimately the signal
can't occur asynchronously anyways, since sooner or later you'll need
to simply wait for the
This is not the place for this, this mailing list is for the
development of Django itself, quite frankly it really isn't
appropriate for django-users either.
Alex
On Jan 3, 3:08 pm, mobil wrote:
> Ten reasons why couchdb is better than (off topic)
>
> http://pylab.blogspot.com/2009/01/ten-reaso
I can confirm this based on the source, the issue is at line 206 here:
http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/django/trunk/django/contrib/contenttypes/generic.py#L199
self.field.model refers to the field.model refers to the original
model that was set when contribute_to_class() was called on the ba
For any sprint occurring before the 11th I could help arrange
something in Chicago
On Dec 30, 10:43 am, Eric Holscher wrote:
> It looks like January 15 is when the Major Feature freeze happens (and
> that is in about 2 weeks). The roadmap[1] says that there will be 1.1
> sprints starting in late
Personally I think I like Michael's suggestion of a using method on a
queryset, and a default in Meta(pretty much the way ordering works).
To his question of reusable applications I think the solution to that
is actually something outside the scope of Django itself, a reusable's
apps views should
Likely both, I would start by filing a ticket. There's a good bet
that one or both sides are making some assumptions that conflict.
Alex
On Dec 27, 10:08 am, "Ariel Mauricio Nunez Gomez"
wrote:
> Not sure if this deserves a ticket(yet), but the current aggregation branch
> in Russell's git hub
On Dec 18, 1:25 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss"
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:35 AM, christian schilling
>
> wrote:
> > mybe changelist views should not check permissions at all, by default.
>
> If you think about this a bit you'll realize why this is a very, very
> bad idea. I can think of at l
I am not a legal expert(that's Justin's job ;-) ), but there is a
precedent for a derivative template language going by the same name,
Dojo also implements the Django template language and calls it just
that. That being said, that, amongst other things preceded the
existence of the DSF.
Alex
On
te on the form that says what field it is
currently validating my instinct is that is in the overengineering
department we were trying to avoid.
Alex
On Dec 12, 8:52 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick
wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 09:31 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Malcolm,
>
>
This is a question that should be asked on the django users mailing
list, this mailing is for the development of Django itself.
Alex
On Dec 13, 1:32 pm, Sura wrote:
> Hi djangonauts,
> I am new to django and i developed the site using django.
> My site works well in my system local serv
n the form itself, I think this is slightly cleaner than
passing the entire form. I've also updated the docs and tests.
Alex
On Dec 11, 11:40 pm, "alex.gay...@gmail.com"
wrote:
> Yeah, I see where you're coming from, I'll write up some code based on
> this, because
008-12-11 at 19:33 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
> > If it's preferable to pass in a function, (field.clean
> > (self.add_warning))
>
> *facepalm*
>
> You aren't explaining what problems you're trying to solve, but just
> popping up alternate options. I
ary on the id of the current thread.
Alex
On Dec 11, 10:25 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick
wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 19:16 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Right, but if the warn() function is going to be some sort of global
> > (as it is now)
> > it needs to have some w
Right, but if the warn() function is going to be some sort of global
(as it is now), it needs to have some way to store the warnings in the
intermediary that is thread safe.
Alex
On Dec 11, 10:14 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick
wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 19:10 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com wr
remove them all from the dictionary.
Alex
On Dec 11, 9:58 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick
wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 18:46 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 11, 9:08 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 13:49 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com
On Dec 11, 9:08 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick
wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 13:49 -0800, alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Over the past few days I've been putting together an implementation of
> > ticket 23[1]. I realise this isn't on the 1.1 features list, but I'd
Well technically it could be done in a backwards compatible way with
some clever introspection.
Alex
On Dec 9, 5:55 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Thomas Guettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3896
>
Over the past few days I've been putting together an implementation of
ticket 23[1]. I realise this isn't on the 1.1 features list, but I'd
still like to solicit any thoughts people have. Right now the API is
that in any form validation method you can using the warning system,
it works by:
from
It should be possible to do this entirely external to Django. The one
thing I would suggest is not to require the user to define the value
for each option, handle that internally. Have some sort of class to
encapsulate the public portion of that.
Alex
On Dec 5, 10:53 am, "Mike Axiak" <[EMAIL P
I think Eric's proposal is dead on, it accomplishes the same task, but
does it without inducing any overhead, since once we assume 2.6 we
inherently assume json is included. So +1 on it as Eric has
suggested, -0 as it was originally proposed.
Alex
On Dec 1, 1:25 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL
Ok, the page is now editable.
On Nov 25, 11:57 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *sigh* I was afraid someone would say that. I didn't think I had to
> state that I was indeed logged in at the time. Perhaps you have
> WIKI_ADMIN priveleges? :) I can edit other articles on the wiki, j
25 matches
Mail list logo
