Sorry, missed your reply somehow,
>
> The line in question, however, should respect subclasses. So your
> example wouldn't fail in the case of a proper subclass.
>
I've heard this claim before,
But per my example above it doesn't. What am I doing wrong there?
--
You received this message because
#x27;m looking for a bit of input for making Django's apps a bit more
> > > > > extendable, either by modifying Django or (preferably) by coming up
> > > > > with a common language on top op Django. The main painpoint are
> > > > > extendable mode
t; > I'm looking for a bit of input for making Django's apps a bit more
> > > > extendable, either by modifying Django or (preferably) by coming up
> > > > with a common language on top op Django. The main painpoint are
> > > > extendable m
gt; with a common language on top op Django. The main painpoint are
> > > extendable models. The idea of 'extendable' is that models from
> > > reusable apps can be extended in any concrete project. The reusable
> > > apps should refer to their own m
language on top op Django. The main painpoint are
> > extendable models. The idea of 'extendable' is that models from
> > reusable apps can be extended in any concrete project. The reusable
> > apps should refer to their own models in such a way that they will get
>
get
> the concrete implementation (extension).
> Class based models if you will.
>
> Context can be found
> here:http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thread/thread/2287...
>
> Currently, apps usually refer to their own models by simply importing
> them from mod
reusable apps can be extended in any concrete project. The reusable
apps should refer to their own models in such a way that they will get
the concrete implementation (extension).
Class based models if you will.
Context can be found here:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thread/thr
