I submitted a new patch, which moves the backend code into
django.core.filestorage and tweaks a few minor things. Most
importantly, this new patch includes documentation in the form of a
new document, files.txt, and some minor updates to model-api.txt and
db-api.txt.
The documentation probably is
On 9/8/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd say something like django.core.filesystems would be a good idea
> (though I'd call it django.core.filestorage and paint the bikeshed
> yellow.)
I have pretty much zero preference on what it's called or where it
goes, so yellow sounds f
On 9/8/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doing some more thinking on the subject, it might make sense to move
> the backends outside the django.db.models area, since they're really
> not specific to that. Maybe something like django.core.filesystems?
> Since, in theory, they could poss
On 9/7/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hope the source makes enough sense to give you guys a decent idea of
> how I'm approaching this. I'm not happy with the organization of it,
> but I'm not sure how best to organize everything. It seems like it'd
> be better to break the file st
On 9/7/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The patch isn't quite ready yet after all. Once I got the code home
> and started to plug it into a proper trunk checkout, it's taking a bit
> more effort than I expected to get it to work properly. I'd rather
> make sure it does in fact work ri
On 9/7/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think, though, for the sake of backwards-compat we shouldn't remove
> get_FIELD_filename() -- storing files on the filesystem is going to be
> by far the common case; let's not make those doing the common thing
> suffer.
Well, get_FIELD_
On 9/7/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I could do that, yes, I just worry that people might use it without
> the proper checks, then have problems when things break. Especially
> when (I expect) the most common use of get_FIELD_filename(), opening a
> file for reading/writing, has a
I could do that, yes, I just worry that people might use it without
the proper checks, then have problems when things break. Especially
when (I expect) the most common use of get_FIELD_filename(), opening a
file for reading/writing, has a much better, and backend-agnostic
method available. I'd muc
On 9/7/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'll be posting the patch in a couple hours, once I get to a PC with a
> proper diff tool. And I'm not so much concerned with whether or not I
> should be setting up a new object, as much as the fact the exact
> functionality provided by get_F
On 9/7/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could you post your current patch to Trac? I'd find it a lot easier to
> comment if I could look at some code. Using an object to represent the
> file rather than a bunch of special model methods definitely seems
> like the right direction
On 9/7/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't want to be annoying, but I thought I'd ping this question,
> because I'd like to get some feedback in time to have pluggable
> FileField backends ready for consideration before (or during) the
> sprint next week.
Could you post your c
I don't want to be annoying, but I thought I'd ping this question,
because I'd like to get some feedback in time to have pluggable
FileField backends ready for consideration before (or during) the
sprint next week.
-Gul
On 9/4/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/4/07, Marty Alchin
On 9/4/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some methods that are implemented include get_filename(),
> get_absolute_url() and get_filesize().
Before this sparks any confusion, allow me to correct myself.
get_filename() is not an available method on the special File object.
I had it impl
I finally have some code to support multiple backends, but I'd like to
ask a question and write some documentation before I create a ticket
for it. I apologize in advance for such a long email, but there's a
bit of backstory necessary to ask the question.
I was wondering about the intended use of
14 matches
Mail list logo
