Hey mate,
Great stuff! A cursory glance shows there isn't anything to log debug
output from url resolution.. something I think I need to add.. I'll
busy a ticket for it :)
D
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've just uploaded a first draft at a patch int
Hi David,
I'm not sure I completely follow - what exactly are you looking to
have logged? The pattern that was matched by the request?
As for raising a ticket - don't worry. About that at this point. For
the moment, just keep he discussion on the ticket; if we decide that
this is needed, we'll ro
Hello,
Actually what I'm used to do in my application is to have a logging
configuration in the settings.py livel and
import logging
logging.getLogger(__name__)
at the module level, so each module gets its own logger. In the
settings level and via a local_settings file one can seat each logging
Authentication = verification
Login = saving the authenticated user so we remember them.
Putting login on the user model is a bad idea.
That will only make the whole auth app less flexible than it already
is.
What if I have another model which isn't a user but is able to login.
Besides.. is_activ
On 25.09.2010, at 08:16, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've just uploaded a first draft at a patch introducing logging into
> Django [1]. I'm calling for feedback on this patch.
>
> [1] http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/12012/t12012-alpha1.diff
>
> This patch is heavily
Hi,
in my last discussion on django-users Russell told me that he'd like
to see four proof-of-concept (or better) backends before considering
NoSQL for inclusion in trunk. The primary point was that enough
eyeballs have looked at the API, first. Now we finally have four
backends for Django-nonrel:
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> Hi,
> in my last discussion on django-users Russell told me that he'd like
> to see four proof-of-concept (or better) backends before considering
> NoSQL for inclusion in trunk.
The number 4 wasn't actually the important bit - it was th
On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> My reason for wanting this is that I'm simply not an expert in any of
> these backends. I know SQL quite well, but I haven't had occasion to
> try out other backends in depth. I can judge the technical merits of a
> patch based on what I know, but I
Hi all,
I've seen some level of interest in the idea of a lazy foreign key
(one whose target table is determined by project configuration in some
way, not hardcoded by the app/model in which it lives). The idea was
most recently brought up again in Eric Florenzano's keynote at
DjangoCon. I have so
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've seen some level of interest in the idea of a lazy foreign key
> (one whose target table is determined by project configuration in some
> way, not hardcoded by the app/model in which it lives). The idea was
> most recently brough
On Sep 25, 1:50 pm, Alex Gaynor wrote:
> ISTM this would solve the "auth.User" issue, but doesn't help reusable
> apps at large: one can trivially imagine a project that wants voting
> (or tagging ;), or commenting, or ...) on more than one model.
Of course! This isn't a silver bullet for every s
On Sep 25, 10:47 am, Carl Meyer wrote:
> The concept:
>
> We introduce the "virtual" model, which is an abstract model with the
> following additional characteristics:
I'm a fan of this implementation strategy, it's a much better solution
than the setting approach IMO.
Thanks,
Eric Florenzano
-
When a free software project fail to progress because of a bad
leadership, you can :
1) make a putsh.
2) make a fork.
Florent
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> My reason for wanting this is that I'm simply not an ex
How can an object other than a User login with that function? The
proprietary implementation of User logins is even more of a case to
out login on User, isn't it? If you cant even login a User object
without doing special things to it first, how can you expect to login
a Foo?
On Sep 25, 4:13 am, H
I apologize Russell. There's been a gross understanding of what I was
asking. I'm not asking how to do "if settings.debug: x = y". I'm
asking for a way to set settings.debug to true dynamically without
having to rely on deployment specific issues. Ie, pass a variable in
when the dev server is run (
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Waldemar Kornewald
wrote:
> On Sep 25, 4:21 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> My reason for wanting this is that I'm simply not an expert in any of
>> these backends. I know SQL quite well, but I haven't had occasion to
>> try out other backends in depth. I can
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 1:47 AM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've seen some level of interest in the idea of a lazy foreign key
> (one whose target table is determined by project configuration in some
> way, not hardcoded by the app/model in which it lives). The idea was
> most recently brough
17 matches
Mail list logo
