David,
On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 01:51 -0500, David Cramer wrote:
> Sorry, to be more clear, that is an *exact* match on what is in the
> database, but using the BINARY form does not return the result.
Please open a ticket for this so it doesn't get forgotten. You'll
somehow have to manage the mail
On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 01:29 -0500, David Cramer wrote:
[...]
> In summary, this is, in fact, a problem in the Django codebase, and
> need's addressed, as it's causing issues for myself, and probably a
> number of other people, even if they haven't realized it yet.
So let's start off by assuming
Sorry, to be more clear, that is an *exact* match on what is in the
database, but using the BINARY form does not return the result.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:45 AM, Malcolm Tredinnick <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 01:29 -0500, David Cramer wrote:
> [...]
> > In summary,
David,
We know you know the difference, but you should also know how much we
love detail. More detail is also needed here.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:29 PM, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't want to seem harsh Karen, but I understand the differences in the
> user lists. This is
I don't want to seem harsh Karen, but I understand the differences in the
user lists. This is not an issue with how I'm using Django, it's an issue
with what Django's doing. This may be better suited as a ticket, but I'd
rather not end up with another trac ticket that emails me daily because it
tur
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:13 AM, David Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was using utf8_general. I'm swapping to utf8_bin to attempt to fix
> it, but binary encodings cause problems as well with unique indexes or
> something similar (can't remember what my test case was from Curse).
>
> On J
