>
> Either way, I'll take a look at your patch.
>
> Jacob
It's up there. I tried to assign to you. # 2304 [patch]...
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this gr
On Jul 7, 2006, at 1:58 PM, OpenMercury wrote:
> I hear you. I looked through the repository yesterday and could find
> no reference to DISABLE_TRANSACTION_MANAGEMENT. I'm fairly new to DJ
> so I don't want to go around breaking stuff. Tell you what I'm going
> to do, I'll re-engineer my change
> I'd say if DISABLE_TRANSACTION_MANAGEMENT doesn't actually disable
> transaction management that we should call that a bug and fix it
> instead of introducing a
> REALLY_DISABLE_TRANSACTION_MANAGEMENT_NO_I_MEAN_IT_THIS_TIME setting.
>
> Jacob
I hear you. I looked through the repository yesterd
On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:32 PM, OpenMercury wrote:
> We'll drop the "Enterprise". I tried everything under the sun
> yesterday using that switch. Nothing would stop the default
> transactional behavior. I must have spent 3 hours debugging the code.
> At the end of the day, I came to the conclusion
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2006, at 9:45 AM, OpenMercury wrote:
> > I'm proposing and have created a Patch that is incorporated into the
> > settings.py and global_settings.py files called:
> > ENTERPRISE_TRANS_MANAGER = True.
>
> How does this differ from setting ``DISABLE_TRANSACTION_
On Jul 7, 2006, at 9:45 AM, OpenMercury wrote:
> I'm proposing and have created a Patch that is incorporated into the
> settings.py and global_settings.py files called:
> ENTERPRISE_TRANS_MANAGER = True.
How does this differ from setting ``DISABLE_TRANSACTION_MANAGEMENT``
to ``True``? See http
Sorry to go into a long winded disertation here..
The organization I'm currently working for has started to Use Django
for limmited functionality. Mainly the ORM to integrate our Postgres
DB with some XML Processing. While doing our Unit testing, I figured
out that we could not do proper commit/
