I don't suppose there's any way to get the patches from ticket #3591
into Django 1.2? If not, can it be marked as definitively not in 1.2
so I can roll a custom solution for myself? It's always hard to tell
from the ticket details what stage tickets like that are in.
Thanks,
Adam
--
You receiv
> The patches on this ticket will not land for 1.2. That ticket
> contains a series of very large patches, and I don't think a firm
> design decision has ever been made about the status of that ticket,
> and it was never on the 1.2 feature list.
>
> Alex
>
Ok, I'll update the ticket.
--
You re
After reading through this entire thread it seems that there are a few
points to be consolidated:
1. DVCS concerns should be pushed to 1.4+ and in the meantime, mirrors
are fine.
2. The management of the current Trac system has organizational issues
- i.e. many people don't know who committers are
to handle this type of ticket?
Regards,
Adam
On Apr 22, 4:33 pm, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
> > On Apr 22, 1:21 pm, Adam Nelson wrote:
>
> >> 2. Assign all of these tickets to 1.3 and nothing else:
>
> >>htt
I agree with Simon, Jerome et al.
Django 1.3 should feel free to go to 8.3 as a minimum Postgres if
there are db backend changes that could take advantage of those
versions' capabilities.
Ubuntu Hardy (the previous LTS) uses Postgres 8.3 and RHEL 5.5 uses
8.4.
It really seems to me that the Djan
The specific problem was already fixed at
http://code.google.com/p/django-app-plugins/issues/detail?id=11
I was speaking of the more general problem about what Pinax's stance
with regards to these type of limitations. From the limited feedback,
it sounds like our minimum standard will be UTF8 fo
Proposal:
After running into numerous 'gotcha' type problems with django-contrib
and django-hotclub on MySQL and looking at some of the MySQL code ,
I'd like to propose that Django have an official minimum MySQL version
for the Django core and possibly a higher recommended version for
contrib, ho
After further review, I did find some webhosts that are still using
the MySQL 4 series which would be restrictive for some Django 1.0
users.
MySQL 4.1 might be a better minimum.
http://mediatemple.net/webhosting/gs/faq.php
-Adam
On Oct 28, 12:29 pm, Adam Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sounds good - thanks for sending that over. I looked high and low for that
document and couldn't find it.
I'll make suggestions in a documentation ticket.
Regards,
Adam
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 29,
Henk,
I think the best solution is to:
A) Do a patch that defaults to the existing functionality and allows for
customization (i.e. the ability to pass characters that would go into the
regex).
And
B) Start a ticket and thread to change the title method for Python on the
Python developer's grou
Actually, this is a typical URL from Google:
1. Search "django models"
2. Get
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/instances/?from=olddocs
IMHO, the correct solution is an actual 301 (permanent) redirect to take
Google and others where the "current" URL of the page is. Unfortunately
A way that might satisfy everybody is to use GROUP BY() and drop
DISTINCT. That's a more robust method anyway.
So, for a distinct, instead of:
SELECT DISTINCT name, (SUBSTRING(name, 1, 3)) AS short_name FROM thing
WHERE is_ok = 1 /* Which produces the incorrect values stated above */
Use:
SEL
12 matches
Mail list logo
