On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 04:57:39PM -0500, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> So far this looks pretty good to me. Assuming you get the rest done
> with a similar level of detail I'll be voting to approve it (and
> possibly signing up to mentor, time-willing).
Thanks for the encouragement, I really appreci
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 12:38:07AM +0200, Johannes Dollinger wrote:
> The only downside is that you'll have to pick a name for the index –
> even if you don't really care (that's historically been a problem
> with `related_name`). But anyway, since Meta.unique_together
> probably cannot be deprecat
Am 06.04.2011 um 23:29 schrieb Michal Petrucha:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 06:22:33AM +0200, Johannes Dollinger wrote:
>>
>> Am 06.04.2011 um 02:45 schrieb Michal Petrucha:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> unique and db_index
>>> ~~~
>>> Implementing these will require some modifications in
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Michal Petrucha wrote:
> Anyway, I'll post at least the part I have already written so that at
> least something can be commented on for now.
So far this looks pretty good to me. Assuming you get the rest done
with a similar level of detail I'll be voting to approv
On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 06:22:33AM +0200, Johannes Dollinger wrote:
>
> Am 06.04.2011 um 02:45 schrieb Michal Petrucha:
>
> [snip]
>
> > unique and db_index
> > ~~~
> > Implementing these will require some modifications in the backend code.
> > The table creation code will have t
Am 06.04.2011 um 02:45 schrieb Michal Petrucha:
[snip]
> unique and db_index
> ~~~
> Implementing these will require some modifications in the backend code.
> The table creation code will have to handle virtual fields as well as
> local fields in the table creation and index crea
I started writing the draft for a full proposal, however, I don't have
time to finish it today as I have to revise for tomorrow's exam. I
will try to finish it in 12 hours at most since I know I'm already
posting it a little bit too late to make it possible to review it
thoroughly.
Anyway, I'll po
