On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
> FWIW, Russ, Joseph Kocherhans, and I discussed this at the DjangoCon
> sprints and our conclusion was to have syncdb only sync a single table
> at a time, and to take a --exclude flag (or was it --include?) to
> specify wha
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 2:34 AM, James Bennett wrote:
> Technically, the major feature freeze for Django 1.2 was to have
> happened sometime yesterday, US Central time. As of this moment, we're
> not actually frozen, but will be as soon as I hear status reports on
> the following (high-priority fe
Model validation is just about ready to go. I have one small issue
with it, namely with ComplexValidator, which I'll describe below, but
I think we can resolve it fairly easily. Here's a bit of background.
Sorry if you're already familiar with the branch.
Validators are functions that are tied to
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Sean Bleier wrote:
>
> As for the timeline, I think that if complex validators are left as-is
> then of course it isn't a deal breaker for inclusion to trunk before
> the major feature freeze on January 5th. However, If complex
> validators need to be reworked a li
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
> What if we had some sort of wrapper class for objs, it could overide
> __getattribute__ to return either an attr if it's an obj, or a
> subscript if it's a datadict. it seems to me this would solve both
> concerns?
I was thinking along simil
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Simon Willison wrote:
> A couple of related tickets filed today about model validation:
>
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12513
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12521
>
> The first one describes the issue best - the new model validation code
> breaks t
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Waylan Limberg wrote:
> I've only scanned the docs the other day and haven't actually used the
> new model validation stuff, so my impressions may be a little off,
> but...
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Joseph Kocherhans
> wrot
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Joseph Kocherhans
> wrote:
> ...
>>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Simon Willison
>>>> wrote:
> ...
>>>>> form = SecretQuestionForm( {"secret_q
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Simon Willison wrote:
> A couple of related tickets filed today about model validation:
>
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12513
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12521
>
> The first one describes the issue best - the new model validation code
> breaks t
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Ivan Sagalaev
wrote:
> Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
>>
>> # Run validation that was missed by the form.
>> p.validate_fields(fields=['user', 'primary_contact'])
>> p.v
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Simon Willison wrote:
> A couple of related tickets filed today about model validation:
>
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12513
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12521
This has been fixed in r12206 [1]. Could people who had issues please
check things o
I just committed r12206 [1] which contains a few
backwards-incompatible changes to model validation. First off,
ModelForm used to validate your entire model and raise
UnresolvableValidationError for any model fields that had errors, but
were excluded from the form. Now, ModelForm will only validate
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Raffaele Salmaso
wrote:
> Raffaele Salmaso wrote:
>> Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
>>> regressions?
>> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12577
> Hello, is anybody out there?
> Sorry if I seem rude, but there is a severe regression an
On Mar 2, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Peter Sagerson wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I submitted a patch[1] for 1.2 which was not accepted and almost certainly
> won't be in the future. This is perfectly fine, but it would be nice to get
> the bug closed wontfix so we have some closure (people are still adding
> t
On 5/5/06, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> what about providing class functions QuerySet.union(cls, qset_list),
> QuerySet.intersection(cls, qset_list), both returning cls, such as:
>
> def union(cls, qset_list):
> """Returns the union of a list of QuerySets, a QuerySet."""
>
On 5/5/06, Victor Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've never submitted code to Django before - what can I do to help
> make this patch go in to the trunk? I've run the Django testsuite
> with all passes, but I'm not sure if I should do anything else.
That's pretty much it. Now it's just waitin
I'd like to get a branch started for the new authentication stuff I've
been working on. A current patch is attatched to ticket #1428. This
will make a easier for people to test this out, and give more feedback
so I can get the docs up to speed.
Thanks,
Joseph
--~--~-~--~~
If this ticket could get some quick love I'd much appreciate it.
Something is definitely wrong, but is the patch acceptable?
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/1767
I brought it up on the list last week, but no one seemed to have an
opinion, or it just got missed.
http://groups.google.com/grou
I'm trying to merge changes from the trunk into the multi-auth branch.
svn merge --dry-run -r 2892:HEAD
http://code.djangoproject.org/svn/django/trunk
works fine, but when I try to do it for real:
svn merge -r 2892:HEAD http://code.djangoproject.org/svn/django/trunk
svn barfs with the
Anyone interested in mutiple authentication backends should check out
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/MultipleAuthBackends
I've updated the authentication docs to cover the new changes, and the
code is ready to go. A self proclaimed newbie has already posted an
example LDAP backend to the wiki
On 5/16/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> perhaps the settings.py auth
> backend might make better example code (perhaps in the "writing auth
> backends" doc?) since it's actually pretty insecure :)
Good call. Done in [2924]
Joseph
--~--~-~--~~~---~-
On 5/25/06, lazaridis_com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At this point, Django's persistency layer seems intresting, but the
> evaluation uncovered a few weaknesses, most importantly the lack of
> schema evolution support:
>
> http://case.lazaridis.com/multi/wiki/DjangoProductEvaluation
Schema ev
I've posted an intial revised version of my summer of code proposal at:
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GenericAuthorization
This should go hand in hand with Chris Long's RowLevelPermissions project:
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/RowLevelPermissions
Also, for the curious, you c
Has anyone tested out the multi-auth branch yet? I haven't heard
anything, so either people aren't using it, or it's working well and
the docs are good enough. Personally, I've been using it with both
external SQL and LDAP backends for over a month now. No issues, but my
apps are internal and don'
I'd like to get a branch started for my summer of code project. It's
not urgent, but something in the next couple of days would be great.
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GenericAuthorization
Thanks,
Joseph
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message becaus
On 6/23/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Time for yays or nays to merging the mutli-auth branch into trunk...
> I've been running it for a few weeks without any problems, so I'd say
> it's pretty much stable.
+1 (for merging that is)
I still want to refator the config code to
On 6/28/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just a quick note that I've merged Joseph's multi-auth branch to
> trunk. As far as I've seen over the past few weeks this doesn't
> break anything, but if it does let me/him know.
>
> Thanks, Joseph.
No problem. Now I get to move my p
I finally wanted it bad enough to code it. Here's the patch. The
template tags could use a little cleanup which I'll finish off if
Jacob and Adrian give this the green light. I copied and pasted some
code :(
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2292
A couple of issues:
- Should the app names o
Sorry it took so long to respond. Busy week.
On 7/8/06, Chris L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've currently set up enabling row level permissions using the meta
> class, e.g. to enable row level permissions for the Mineral model you
> would have:
>
> class Mineral(models.Model):
> name = mo
On 7/14/06, Chris Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How would you handle multiple checkers? I'm designing RLP to work on
> top of model level checking. Would it be:
I actually hadn't thought of that. I thought there would be one and
only one type of checking for each model. I can't think of a
On 8/3/06, Chris Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Will there be any support for the previous method of checking
> permissions? (e.g. will users.has_permission work?)
I was planning on keeping the User.has_perm method around for now, but
I think it ought to go away before 1.0. It won't be cal
On 8/3/06, Chris Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'll try to be on tonight between 7 and 11 MT, I just finished off a 4
> hour meeting and need to finish off some work then head home. I might
> be too tired to make it on tonight, but I'll certainly try.
No problem. I'll be around tomorrow mor
On 8/4/06, Bjørn Stabell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Just a question; how does this compare pros and cons with single-table
> inheritance, used in Rails? See:
>
> http://twelvelabs.com/singletable/index.html
http://www.objectmatter.com/vbsf/docs/maptool/ormapping.html
Check out the section
On 8/17/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if this is more relevant to the Generic Authorization
> branch, but has anyone looked at implementing the owner permissions
> (the user who creates the object automatically has delete/modify
> permissions)?
This is something that should
So I should probably get started on the generic-auth and
per-object-permissions (hereafter pop) integration soon. I've had
problems trying to merge changes from the trunk into the generic-auth
branch, so I'd just assume call that branch dead. The actual
generic-auth code is just a patch to the tru
On 9/1/06, Linicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Once (gen-auth/pop) are merged, what are the major barriers in getting
> that branch merged into trunk?
Probably just review by Jacob and Adrian. There are several branches
from summer of code that will be competing for their attention over
the ne
On 9/6/06, Linicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm planning to move my development work to the pop/gen_auth branch
> once they are merged. Hopefully I will be able to give some good
> feedback at that point. When the merge is complete, would it be
> possible to have you guys merge with trunk f
On 9/11/06, Gary Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Are you guys also planning on
> removing the admin application's dependence on
> contrib.auth.models.User?
That's my long-term goal, but generic-auth isn't enough to get there.
is_staff, is_superuser, is_active, get_and_create_messages, and
p
On 9/11/06, Ivan Sagalaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've just found out that request.user is an attribute of request's class
> not of an instance. Which means that in the environment with multiple
> requests (threaded or not) every request.user always points to a single
> LazyUser instance wh
On 9/11/06, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/11/06, Ivan Sagalaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I've just found out that request.user is an attribute of request's class
> > not of an instance. Which means that in the environment
I've been working on the same thing, but my ideas differ slightly from
Adrian's. In a lot of way we're on the same page though, so that much
is encouraging :) I've liberally stolen ideas from both FormEncode and
a version of Zope 3's formlib.
There are four main classes the mostly correspond to A
On 9/12/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hence, with this new API, the above view code would be written like this:
>
> form = ContactForm()
> if request.method == 'POST' and form.is_valid(**request.POST):
> send_email_and_redirect()
> return render_to_response
On 9/13/06, Ivan Sagalaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
> > Assumptions: form.bind(data) does *not* return a BoundForm. bind does
> > the validation and probably populates form.errors or .errors() or
> > whatever. bind returns True
On 9/13/06, Rob Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (I'm not an official "dev" so I hope it's not considered inappropriate
> of me to provide my feedback.)
It's not inappropriate at all. :)
> Instead of the assumption that bind() validates, why not have an
> is_valid() method that assumes bind
On 9/18/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is there a reason why the app name doesn't appear in the admin
> breadcrumbs? I have an app with a model called 'Groups', and the
> breadcrumb for it is the same as that for the auth model 'Groups'. The
> URL is right, of course, I just
On 10/10/06, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> So now I'm just confused as to what might be "best". Certainly two sides
> to this. I probably prefer the current consistency a little more, but
> then there's iterator(). So I'm going to do the professional thing here:
> hope that Adr
On 10/11/06, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> (i'm not sure i understand what you mean by "iterator protocol")
The "iterator protocol" basically refers to __iter__() and next(). Its
the stuff that python calls behind the scenes when you iterate over
something.
http://docs.python.org/l
On 10/16/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But I have only tested this on Linux, so I'd appreciate it if folks
> could test out the command "python setup.py install" on various
> different platforms. Just grab the SVN version of Django and try
> installing it using "python setup.p
On 10/16/06, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The good news here is that in "from" clauses, MySQL, PostgreSQL and
> SQLite all allow "as" to be optional, so we can omit it across the
> board. No need for a case-by-case analysis (and now somebody will say
> that MS-SQL requires it)
On 10/24/06, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/24/06, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In other words, I hope I haven't talked you into breaking trunk. :-/
> >
>
> Relevant (or so I thought) doc:
> http://www.modpython.org/live/current/doc-html/pyapi-mprequest-meth.html
On 10/25/06, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/24/06 5:25 PM, Jason Davies wrote:
> > I think we should just distribute decimal.py to maintain Python 2.3
> > compatibility.
>
> I'm +1 on the patch if someone can resolve two things:
>
> * Is the license for decimal.py compatibl
On 11/1/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I need to add session keys to the session right from my LDAP
> authenication backend. I think it is as simple as passing the session
> object to the backend during authentication. Has anyone else needed
> this kind of functionality? mayb
On 11/6/06, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 11/6/06, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > so, in short, the only testable branches seems to be fullHistory and
> > rowLevelPermissions, and even there it's not clear if they are now
> > considered done, or still in progress.
>
As of now generic-auth is missing part of the functionality that would
make it truly useful. You can check permissions on a single object
using the extensible has_permission function, but often times you need
to get a list of objects for which a user has a specified permission.
Getting all possibl
On 11/30/06, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 11/27/06, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not sure that this should be a function however. It may also make
> > sense as a Manager and/or QuerySet method.
>
> It *feels* like
On 12/15/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello, i was thinking of developing some modules that did the
> transalation from any DataBase supported by Django to the Django
> Models. For example, i have a db in production but would like to use it
> with Django, then i would have
On 12/28/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I did look at making them edit inline but I think it would be much
easier to show them in a non-editable way and then allow them to edit
if they need to.
Not sure what it would take to create a different type of edit inline.
Hey Jim.
1. Named auth backends
Right now, user logins are coupled to the actual location of an auth
backend. The python dotted path of the backend is stored in the user's
session when they login. If you were to move the backend to a
different module, any user who was logged in via that backend would
get
On 1/11/07, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 1/10/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I propose to register and lookup backends by name to fix this
> > problem. Here's a configuration sample:
> >
On 1/11/07, Nicola Larosa (tekNico) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Every middle-to-big project has its own version, and Django is no
> exception, look in django.utils.datastructures.
I have a patch ready to go for named backends, and it uses
django.utils.datastructures.SortedDict from django pure
On 1/16/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry this has taken a while to look at - hopefully I'm not too late
to make a meaningful contribution...
Not a problem. I still haven't finished a patch yet and am certainly
still open to suggestions.
I would make another suggestio
I'd like to see a way to customize the list_display, search_fields,
and list_filter (and possibly list_display_links?) attributes of
ModelAdmin in the same way as change_list_queryset, etc. The use case
is to hide fields in the change list depending on who is accesing the
page. This should be a pr
On 1/16/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'd like to take the clean route and move the admin definitions into a
> separate file, or at least still in the models.py but not within the
> models themselves. Of course, that's not as convenient as defining the
> admin stuff directly w
On 2/17/07, voltron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> class UserManager(models.Manager):
> def create_user(self, username, email, password):
> "Creates and saves a User with the given username, e-mail and
> password."
> now = datetime.datetime.now()
> user = self.model(Non
On 2/19/07, David Danier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to contribute creating this, if someone is interested.
> Perhaps the best place to start (or even work if Joseph Kocherhans likes
> my plans?) is the generic-auth-branch. I believe such a system should be
> rea
On 2/26/07, Matthew Flanagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Specifically, I was referring to the has_*_permission() stuff in the
> new ModelAdmin class. Which is new functionality aside from the
> oldforms to newforms port.
A lot of the generic-auth and RLP code is nasty stuff to try to
integrate
On 2/26/07, Matthew Flanagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 2/27/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 2/26/07, Matthew Flanagan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Specifically, I was referring to the has_*_permi
On 2/27/07, David Danier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As an enhancement it would be nice to get the generic-auth-branch into
> the trunk (slightly changed perhaps). So not only authorization can be
> done on an abstract way, but permission-checks, too.
I'll probably work on this once the newfor
On 3/3/07, Ivan Sagalaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> > Edit-inline is also going to be moved out into the admin declaration,
>
> Edit-inline was also useful outside of the admin, in manipulators. Are
> there any plans to have newforms handling this or this will become
On 3/25/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now that we have 0.96 out the door, I'd love to wrap up the
> newforms-admin branch, which is mostly missing edit-inline support but
> works well for other cases.
>
> Joseph Kocherans was working on edit-inline support, but I haven't
> see
On 3/25/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now that we have 0.96 out the door, I'd love to wrap up the
> newforms-admin branch, which is mostly missing edit-inline support but
> works well for other cases.
>
> Joseph Kocherans was working on edit-inline support, but I haven't
> see
On 3/26/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey Adrian. Looking at the newforms-admin branch tonight, I can't seem
> to get some things working.
Gah. Nevermind. Only the index page is working of AdminSite, and it's
root method acts like a view that take
On 4/6/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As of [4944], the newforms-admin admin site should be working properly
> -- you're right that I hadn't finished the AdminSite stuff. (Sorry for
> the miscommunication!) It's working pretty well now. To activate the
> admin site, do this:
>
On 4/29/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1) Is there room for a 'fields' argument on form_for_instance and
> form_for_model - a list of field names that you want included on the
> form (defaulting to None, meaning the full list), so that it is simple
> to create a form with a
On 5/5/07, Jari Pennanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Modularity of edit inline? Any better?
>
> Currently:
> models.ForeignKey(Other, edit_inline=models.TABULAR, parameters...)
> obiviously is a big waste of OO abilities,
>
> instead something like, the OO way:
> models.ForeignKey(Other, edit_i
On 5/10/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/5/07, Jari Pennanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Modularity of edit inline? Any better?
> >
> > Currently:
> > models.ForeignKey(Other, edit_inline=models.TABULAR, parameters...)
On 5/10/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 5/11/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 4/29/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I realize that you can subclass the form cl
On 5/13/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What's your ETA on these changes? I finally have some free time this
> week, and I'd like to work toward getting this branch finalized. If
> you don't have time to hack on this, let me know where you left off.
I'm still working on the for
Has anyone noticed a fairly recent order of magnitude slowdown in how
long it takes to run the django test suite? I used to get times of
about 14 seconds around March (at PyCon) but it's taking ~150 seconds
now. It's quite possibly something that's changed in my setup, but I
figured I'd see if any
On 5/14/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 5/15/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone noticed a fairly recent order of magnitude slowdown in how
> > long it takes to run the django test suite? I used to get
The generic view django.views.create_update.update_object requires the
object to have an id in line 99.
manipulator = mod.ChangeManipulator(object.id)
Objects with OneToOneFields don't have an id attribute. Instead they
have something like "relatedobject_id" I'm not sure where this should
be
On 9/15/05, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 9/15/05, Simon Willison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > from django.models.blog import Blog, Entry
> >
> > Blog.get_list()
> > Blog.get_object()
> > Entry.get_iterator()
>
> I have a natural aversion to class methods like that. To me,
On 10/10/05, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/10/05, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd like to use doctest for testing my model classes, but the model
> > metaclass overwrites my classes docstrings. Is there any reason
On 10/10/05, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/10/05, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd like to use doctest for testing my model classes, but the model
> > metaclass overwrites my classes docstrings. Is there any reason
I was just considering how I might add custom attributes to fields in
my models. I need to render forms that have a hierarchy of sorts,
fields need to have subfields. Of course I'll need some custom code to
generate forms. I'd like to include a 'parent' attribute on all of my
fields so I don't hav
On 12/21/05, Daniel Poelzleithner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Apps sould define a __version__ in __init__.py wich sould be checked onthe dependencies check.maybe a syntax like:__dependencies__ = (('django.contrib.auth',">=0.1,!=0.2"),('my.app.bla', "==
0.3"))would require a version of contrib.auth t
I think the metasystem is one of Django's greatest strengths. Django's
admin system has literally cut my development time down by weeks for
most projects. The admin system does 90% of what I need, but getting
the other few features requires a lot more work than it should. I
think this should be re
On 12/27/05, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 7. Allow custom auditing methods ''without'' having to create a custom view.
>
> I've seen a lot of people ask for this, and I have yet to see an
> explanation of how to do it ''witho
Treating django.models.core and django.models.auth as special cases is
kind of confusing. They should be regular apps, but we don't want to
have to add 2 extra steps (installing the 2 apps) to get a django
project up and running. Here's a few ideas for fixing the problems.
Create 2 new apps, djan
On 1/6/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 1/6/06, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Treating django.models.core and django.models.auth as special cases is
> > kind of confusing. They should be regular apps, but we don't wa
On 1/6/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> One more idea, though, would be to split "core" into
> django.contrib.sessions, django.contrib.contenttypes and
> django.contrib.sites. Packages would go away, because they're not
> really necessary (we used them heavily about 1.5 years ago
On 1/6/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If no one is using packages I'll just drop it.
>
> This is a bit easier said than done...The content-types table depends
> on it. How about splitting this patch into several stages --
>
> * Move sessions from core to django.contrib.sessio
In the magic-removal branch most traces of automatic pluralization
have been removed, but the table names are still pluralized by
default. I don't think they should be. Is this just a change that's
meant to happen, but hasn't yet? I seem to remember a thread where
people wanted to get rid of all a
On 1/6/06, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi.
> I'm using packages.
> I think it is a good place to put stuff like package-specific preferences.
I'm going to leave them as is for now. There's actually quite a bit
that depends on them that I need to take a closer look at. I'm
starting
On 1/6/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Move auth to django.contrib.admin (and change dependencies)
Did you mean move auth to django.contrib.auth here? Or do you really
want it moved into admin?
Joseph
Here's a status update on moving dango.contib.core/auth into django.contirb:
* Move sessions from core to django.contrib.sessions (and change dependencies)
Done.
* Move sites from core to django.contrib.sites (and change dependencies)
Done.
* Move auth to django.contrib.admin (and change depend
On 1/8/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > django.core.extensions -> django.shortcuts
> > - includes render_to_string
>
> +1. "django.shortcuts" is a *perfect* name for this module.
I like this idea, but I think that shortcuts of whatever shoul
On 1/9/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 1/8/06, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Here's a status update on moving dango.contib.core/auth into django.contirb:
> >>
> > * Remove Package model (and dependencies on it)
On 1/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1132 and 1164 both provides solutions for the CurrentUser issue), but
> as
> of now, these solutions have been (in my own opinion rightly) deemed
> too
> hackish to get committed. This thread is aimed at finding a clean
> implementation
I hate to request more changes to magic-removal... but that's where
this should happen. Maybe it should wait until after it's been merged
though.
Currently the redirects after add_stage and change_stage in the admin
system are hardcoded. One of the most frequent requests I get in my
projects is t
1 - 100 of 278 matches
Mail list logo
