On 4 abr, 00:28, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about replacing the idea of a ModelForm with a ModelField? Then
> for shorter
> forms you could list all the fields explicitly, without having to
> recode all the
> default field definitions.
I think should be hard to implemen
This mail maybe can be splitted in two, but I write only one because
both are related.
Ok, ModelForms is a very very wonderful thing, but I want to talk
about (maybe) excessive implicitness.
Look at this form declaration:
class AuthorForm(forms.Form):
name = myforms.MyCharField(max_length=1
On 12 dic, 01:30, "Mike Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey All,
>
> I've been looking at how to better serve my static files for django sites,
> and I'm particularly interested in things like Javascript handling.
>
> For example if we were to look at RoR, they have their include tags which
Hi,
I begin four years ago with a CMS called Plone [1]. It's based on Zope
aplication server, and is great for functionality, and above all for
number of aplications (products by plone) developed. Ok, Plone has
many fails (i.e. Zope), and is a CMS (Django is a framework). When I
meet django two y
On 22 sep, 03:21, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, msaelices wrote:
>
> > You don't see well the code.
>
> Oh, you're right!
>
> I better stop triaging and go to bed now ;-)
Good night. I do the same (It's 3:26AM) :-(
>
IL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, msaelices wrote:
>
> > I have uploaded a patch for improve generic relations performance:
>
> >http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5570
>
> > But mir closed my ticket because it think patch is not convenient.
>
> >
The problem is the [[TOC]] proccessor situated on top:
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Tutorials
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to dj
I have uploaded a patch for improve generic relations performance:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5570
But mir closed my ticket because it think patch is not convenient.
I think there are a lot of files with same type of caching. I don't
use django cache framework. I use a simple dicti
OK, after all, the main change it's already commited, and is the
important one.
On 17 sep, 01:24, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 11:21 -0700, msaelices wrote:
> > I created a ticket for it. Ticket is:
> >http://code.djangoproject.c
On 16 sep, 20:58, msaelices <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is the last patch update:
>
> http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup...
Sorry, the correct link is this:
http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup_6364.
This is the last patch update:
http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup_6364.2.diff
It improve performance a little, but It's difficult to test because
differences are minimal.
On 16 sep, 20:21, msaelices <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I created a
I created a ticket for it. Ticket is:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5513
After more than one hour of profiling, I found the problem. It creates
a session for every request.
I've attached patch on ticket:
http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup_6364.diff
Agai
Anybody has testing the performance of new improvements in session
storage? In changeset http://code.djangoproject.com/changeset/6333 was
implementing session backends for filesystem and memcached. This might
improve performance of a site, freeing database for hard work.
On 15 sep, 03:22, David C
Oh! beautiful code! could you paste Dependency model besides?
On 15 sep, 03:41, "Honza Král" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> we use something likehttp://dpaste.com/19671/
>
> it
> - invalidates the cache when object is updated (based on registered test)
> - can cooperate with apache active mq
http://code.djangoproject.com/ is down.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 gr
It's a common fact that admin interface is awesome, but if an user have
edit permissions in that object class can edit all objects of this
class. It obviously sucks.
Ok, there is "row level permission" branch, but, generally we dont need
all this stuff... it's more simple.
Let's go to a example
16 matches
Mail list logo
