Re: A question related to URLConf, Reverse URL, etc...

log/tags etc... My solution (the one in the patch in ticket 3402 is fully backward compatible, will only affect the views that *need* the stem, and is not affected by how many levels of includes there are. And imho I think it solves the problem in a simple non-obtrusive way. So, I would like you guys t

Re: A question related to URLConf, Reverse URL, etc...

Well, I went ahead and created a patch for this. It is in ticket 3402 (http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3402) -- Thanks, Medhat On Jan 26, 12:18 pm, "medhat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > the url should behttp://www.example.com/categories/x/ > > -- > Medhat >

Re: A question related to URLConf, Reverse URL, etc...

atches, one for each URLResolver? > > On Jan 27, 7:12 am, "medhat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Here is even a better idea... > > > in your urls.py when you "from django.conf.urls.defaults import *" this > > will import 'stem' in add

Re: A question related to URLConf, Reverse URL, etc...

the url should be http://www.example.com/categories/x/ -- Medhat On Jan 26, 12:12 pm, "medhat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is even a better idea... > > in your urls.py when you "from django.conf.urls.defaults import *" this > will import 'stem&#

Re: A question related to URLConf, Reverse URL, etc...

views.tag_list and pass it the request object and two keyword parameters: tag = 'x' and stem = /categories/ I already have a patch that does this. I don't have unit tests or documentation yet. But if this looks like a patch that would be accepted, I can definitely work on the tests and

A question related to URLConf, Reverse URL, etc...

as much, but will be backwards compatible is to add "stem" to the request object (even though I understand this is not really a request property) So, I would like to hear what you guys think. -- Thanks! Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message

An idea for urls.py and maybe reverse url resolving

idea. Another alternative, which I don't like as much, but will be backwards compatible is to add "stem" to the request object (even though I understand this is not really a request property) So, I would like to hear what you guys think. -- Thanks! Medhat --~--~-~--~~---

Is this group moderated, or is it a bug with google groups?

So many times I send messages to the group, but my message does not appear at all, or it might appear a day or two after I actually send it, which of course makes it appear down on the list, and nobody really sees it. -- Thanks, Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You

Re: New Django ticket system workflow ideas

g and directing people for where they should spend their time. Just my 2 cents :-) -- Thanks, Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send

custom settings for tests

a foreign key. I can see this also to be useful with middleware, if you want to test a specific middleware with other ones present or absent. Does that make sense, or am I missing something?! -- Thanks, Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message b

Re: #2333 Pt 3 - Test system fixture data

Is there any update on including this into trunk?! I have been checking the ticket daily :-) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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

Is this a bug in get_list_or_404?!

s): obj_list = klass._default_manager.filter(*args, **kwargs) if obj_list.count() == 0: raise Http404 return obj_list --- -- Thanks, Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django d

Re: Enhancement:Open tag cannot support multiline

like: {# {% if x %} blah blah blah {% endif %} #} will not be commented out. And I think this is a far more common scenario. -- Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers"

Should we have another 'post_save' signal?

the uploaded files in FileField-derived fields are saved. Should the post_save signal be moved to after the files are saved, or can we have another signal that is fired then? -- Thanks, Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are

an 'empty' block tag

added the {% eblock ... %} tag that does not require an end tag. And here is the patch. I am posting it here to see if people think this is a good idea... if it is, I will create a ticket. -- Thanks a lot, Medhat Index: loader_tags.py

A bug in reverse url lookup? (and a possible patch)

ust wanted more people to look at it first, since I still consider myself new with django, and I wanted to make sure that I did not miss something, or if people will planning on using this differently. -- Thanks!

Re: Reverse URL lookup implementation

> -- > Adrian Holovaty > holovaty.com | djangoproject.com > Hi, Is there any reason this is not added to the repository? -- Thanks! Medhat --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django d

Re: OneToOneField behavior doesn't match docs

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Joseph Kocherhans wrote: > > The current trunk and magic-removal docs say this about OneToOneField: > > [snip] > > No feedback, so I've commited a patch. OneToOneField now behaves like > ForeignKey for adding objects in the admin system, and is displayed as > a read onl