Re: Generic archive_month view and inclusive ranges

On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 17:59 -0500, James Bennett wrote: > On 8/13/07, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Proposal #1 seems simpler, but this is not a strong opinion. :-) > > The only thing that's keeping me from posting a patch for this right > now with option 1 is a lingering doubt a

Re: Proposal: runserver --with-fixture

On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 18:36 -0400, Todd O'Bryan wrote: > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 16:31 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > I'm proposing a "--with-fixture" flag to django-admin.py, so that you > > could do something like this: > > > > django-admin.py runserver --with-fixture=mydata.json > > > >

Re: Maybe we need more triagers? Or something else?

On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 17:03 -0500, Gary Wilson wrote: [...] > I stumbled upon bazaar's Bundle Buggy [1] the other day while reading > the Bazaar Core Developer Handbook [2]. Essentially, the way things > work is that patches are submitted via email (by sending to a mailing > list with special tex

Re: Maybe we need more triagers? Or something else?

On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 02:03 +, SmileyChris wrote: > On Aug 14, 10:24 am, Gary Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Oh, I forgot to mention something about possibly introducing a bug day. > > +1 > > Perhaps with an IRC channel for discussion? You definitely want a separate IRC channel. And

Re: Proposal: runserver --with-fixture

On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 21:28 -0700, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 04:31:42PM -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > So I was writing Django view unit tests and setting up fixtures with > > sample data, and it hit me -- wouldn't it be useful we made it easy to > > run the Django developm

Re: Newforms suggestions - pre_clean? magic cleaned_data? - access to errors?

On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 23:51 -0500, Gary Wilson wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 18:00 -0700, sime wrote: > >> 1. Magic cleaned_data - So we can get/set values out of order and > >> before the clean() run, having themselves clean

Re: BlobField before .97

On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 16:29 -0700, Simon Greenhill wrote: > The last time we discussed this [1] I think everyone sort of concluded > that a binary field was a sensible idea as long as it's PRIMARILY for > storing small chunks of binary info, and not an easy-I-want-to-store- > binaries-in-my-databa

Re: testing broken

On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 04:15 +, SmileyChris wrote: > Recent checkin http://code.djangoproject.com/changeset/5887 broke > running an individual test: I've tried to fix the same problem (as intended by [5887]) in a different way in [5892] and [5893]. Regards, Malcolm -- No one is listening un

Re: Shouldn't _ be ugettext instead of gettext?

Hey Michael, On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 16:52 +0200, Michael Radziej wrote: > Hi, > > currently, django/conf/__init__.py still sets __builtins__['_'] = gettext. > > This causes a UnicodeDecodeError in code like the following line when the > the translated message contains non-ASCII characters: > >

Re: Only update modified fields

On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 18:59 -0600, Norman Harman wrote: > SmileyChris wrote: > > Collin has put a lot of effort in to this ticket [1] which is still > > waiting as a design decision. The latest patch is (apart from lack of > > docs) ready for check-in in my opinion. Could we have a decision on > >

Re: ticket 3310

On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 21:04 -0600, Norman Harman wrote: > ticket 3310 http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3310 > manage.py test does not work if there is not a model.py in the application > > The 6mo patch doesn't apply anymore. Is there a reason it was never applied? > Apps > without models

Re: ticket 3310

On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 22:27 -0600, Norman Harman wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > One obvious test would have been to create a test directory that didn't > > contain a models file but did contain a tests.py file. > I would be wary of writing unittests that cr

Oracle guys ... can you help with this?

I'm not sure if any of the Oracle devs are watching django-users (no need you should be, btw). In case you aren't you might be able to help out on this thread http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_frm/thread/fbaeab8eef802e94 It's a little beyond my skillset with Oracle, but it looks

Re: Only update modified fields

On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 21:09 -0700, Collin Grady wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick said the following: > > See earlier threads for why transparent behaviour is not a very safe > > idea. If you override save(), for example, it's going to be very easy to > > end up with things no

Re: Only update modified fields

On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 21:51 -0700, Collin Grady wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick said the following: > > The current latest patch fails in a dangerous way, which is why I'm > > against it. Fail safely (so that my data always gets saved when I call > > save()) and it's up

Re: Oracle guys ... can you help with this?

On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 13:49 +1000, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > I'm not sure if any of the Oracle devs are watching django-users (no > need you should be, btw). In case you aren't you might be able to help > out on this thread > > http://groups.google.com/group/djang

Re: Adding save to UploadedFile

On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 12:39 -0400, Marty Alchin wrote: > On 8/16/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > There was some discussion a while back[1] about trying to make > FileField more self-sufficient, but I had been holding off on any of > that until Malcolm reveals his grand pl

Re: Adding save to UploadedFile

On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 22:37 -0400, Marty Alchin wrote: [...] > On a related note, if (as I expect would the case here) a patch ends > up involving multiple tickets, how should that be handled in Trac? > Just pick one of the tickets that seems most important and go with > that one? These kinds of r

Re: How to Use mysql ENCODE / DECODE function

On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 04:49 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I am using mysql as back end, > i have encoded data stored as > > SQL: Insert into test values('919986049773',ENCODE(abc123, > 'key123')) ; > > and to retrive > > SQL: SELECT mobnum, DECODE(Password, 'key123') FROM test > > Can anyo

Re: clean method on ModelChoiceField

On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 09:32 +, james_027 wrote: > hi, > > while doing some experiment with ModelChoiceField, and having success > with this settings ModelChoiceField(Item.objects.all(), > widget=TextInput). There's one thing that didn't work right for me ... > If I have Item.objects.filter(na

Re: suggestion about {% url %}

On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 09:22 +0800, !张沈鹏(电子科大 08年毕业) wrote: > Look at this , > > http://www.djangosnippets.org/snippets/373/ > > that why I think below code is useful > > mytags.py: > . > @register.inclusion_tag('xxx.html') > def page_link(url_name): >return {"url_name":url_name} > _

Help?! - Re: [Changeset] r5923 - django/trunk/django/core/management

Russ, On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 23:51 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Author: russellm > Date: 2007-08-17 23:51:51 -0500 (Fri, 17 Aug 2007) > New Revision: 5923 > > Modified: >django/trunk/django/core/management/__init__.py > Log: > Added the ability for end users to register commands with man

Re: suggestion about {% url %}

On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 18:03 +0800, !张沈鹏(电子科大 08年毕业) wrote: > In a word , if {% url urlname %} could not find the urlname in url > patterns , it will try to find context[urlname] in patterns. Aah ... so an attempt to allow variables in the URL tag. Okay. Now I understand what you're trying to do.

Re: Unhandled exception if object with existing unique key saved

On Sat, 2007-08-18 at 21:31 -0500, James Bennett wrote: > On 8/18/07, Szekeres István <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In [5]: u=User() > > I think it is a problem that this is > > - not mentioned in the documentation > > - not handled anywhere in django code. > > This is what the forms and validat

Re: Changeset 5933 is causing breakage

On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 01:36 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I noticed that Nesh's thumbnails started breaking after I updated to > 5933. I'm not sure if this is a Django bug or if Nesh is doing > something wrong. Ramiro Morales reported a similar thing in #5204. My fault; I'll have a look at i

Re: Changeset 5933 is causing breakage

On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 12:54 +1000, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 01:36 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I noticed that Nesh's thumbnails started breaking after I updated to > > 5933. I'm not sure if this is a Django bug or if Nesh is doing > &g

Re: Unhandled exception if object with existing unique key saved

On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 05:19 -0700, ludvig.ericson wrote: > Well actually, I see implementation leakage in the API here. > > Does it make sense that the Django ORM raises SQLite3 exceptions? I > wouldn't want _to try to try to_ catch either of all integrity > exceptions. > > Perhaps something lik

Re: GSoC Update: [Check Constraints] Django Developers stump me, Final Update as GSoC Project

On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 15:25 +, Thejaswi Puthraya wrote: > Hello Django Developers, > > On August 20th ie tomorrow, Google Summer of Code 2007 will officially > close and all students are required to commit the code written over > the past two odd months. As I was preparing to commit my code I

Re: db backend refactoring

On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 23:01 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote: [...] > I haven't yet made DatabaseError, IntegrityError and the introspection > and creation functionality accessible via the django.db.connection > object. Those changes can happen in the near future, if they need to > be made. If we do

Re: validation aware models? or check constraints?

On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 03:54 -0700, pk11 wrote: > hi all, > > a while back(http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/ > browse_thread/thread/fef854223b97e49c/c0e0ccce78369f05? > lnk=gst&q=validation+aware+models&rnum=4#c0e0ccce78369f05) there was a > discussion about adding a way to perform

Re: query.py refactoring by Malcolm: status?

On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 23:33 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > Malcolm -- what's the status of the query.py refactoring you've been > working on? We have a bunch of features waiting for that refactoring, > including SQL aggregation support. > > It'd be great to land that refactoring once and for all

Re: Time for a new release?

On Sun, 2007-08-26 at 09:35 +0200, Nicola Larosa wrote: > Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > Is there any other, better way to do it than how it's currently being > > done? It's an imperfect system, but it's "more perfect" than the other > > choice that comes to mind. > > Yes, there is a better way to ge

Re: Time for a new release?

On Sun, 2007-08-26 at 10:27 +0200, Nicola Larosa wrote: > Adrian Holovaty wrote: [...] > > But the problem isn't with the documentation improvements, of course -- > > those don't confuse people (we hope!). The problem is with the parts of > > the documentation that are specific to the Django devel

Re: Max. size of User.email is 75 chars

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 19:01 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On 8/30/07, SmileyChris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > It has always made me wonder why it isn't even overridable. Is there a > > design decision behind this or has it just never been asked? > > I don't see why it needs to be con

Re: #4412 -- Optgroups in newforms select widgets

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 21:18 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been looking at ticket #4412: > > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/4412 > > This ticket adds support for optgroups in selects for newforms. I've > uploaded an updated patch that works with trunk and newforms-ad

Re: some trouble with an older bug

On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 02:49 -0700, Julian wrote: > hi there, > > until now i am very happy with django, but something made me spent > some hours of time with it, i've figured this out: > > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5320 > > wich has an underlying issue: > > http://code.djangoproject

Re: How should I handle this test?

On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 10:42 +, SmileyChris wrote: > I wrote a patch [1] to fix counting distinct ValueQuerySets. My test > checks that it works > > >>> len(Article.objects.values('pub_date').distinct()) > 5 > >>> Article.objects.values('pub_date').distinct().count() > 5 > > The problem is, t

Re: Let's schedule a Django sprint

On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 15:32 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > It's about time we scheduled an official Django sprint. We've got a > bunch of features that are almost done but haven't yet been > committed/merged -- including newforms-admin, ORM aggregate support, > multi-DB support and GeoDjango. Plu

Re: accessing db api from models.py breaks apps/models loading

On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 11:07 -0700, Ilya Semenov wrote: > I've run into this problem when using dbsettings / django-values in my > project, but the source of the problem actually lies deeper. > > There's a core class django.db.models.loading.AppCache which populates > the list of project apps and

Re: Let's schedule a Django sprint

On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 16:44 +0530, Allagappan M wrote: > Hi, > On 9/6/07, vivek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I would like to join in although I am new to django and python. I am > > hoping with around 1000 open tickets you can still use some noob hand. > Do count me in.I'm familiar with both dja

Re: Let's schedule a Django sprint

On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 21:29 +1000, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: [...] > I've just created a wiki page for people who want to write down that > they're going to be able to attend. > > Everybody else should feel free to add themselves, of course. Doh! The wiki page is http://

Re: Let's schedule a Django sprint

On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 07:35 -0400, Marty Alchin wrote: > On 9/6/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Definitely. Before next Friday we'll try to get some ideas up on the > > wiki, too. > > Does this mean there will be some sort of agenda planned f

Re: Django, Components, and Interfaces

On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 12:48 -0400, Joshua 'jag' Ginsberg wrote: [...] > First, every section of Django becomes customizeable without chopping > up the source tree. We already permit drop-in authentication backends, > database backends, and caching backends; there's been talk of drop-in > session b

Re: newforms-admin: unique_together validation

On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 12:48 -0700, akaihola wrote: > Today I challenged myself to dive into newforms-admin source code and > try to figure out how to fix the unique_together problem for inline > forms in admin. > > I thought I'd share what I found and where I got stuck in case someone > wants to

Re: proposal: helper functions for validation

On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 15:58 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: [...] > - I'm also inclined to continue the similarities, and make the > assertion functions members on BaseForm. This would allow a > significant simplification of your proposal, as the data locations > (i.e., self.cleaned_data) can be

Re: proposal: helper functions for validation

On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 21:46 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On 9/9/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 15:58 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > [...] > > > - I'm also inclined to continue the similaritie

Re: ANN: newforms-admin syntax change for inlines

On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 10:56 -0500, Joseph Kocherhans wrote: [...] > I suppose I could make the syntax backwards-compatible by naming the > factory functions the same as the existing classes, but I think it > would make things more confusing. I think you're more across the subtleties of this featu

Re: Overriding admin forms

On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 18:25 -0500, Joseph Kocherhans wrote: > There's a ticket in Trac to override the BaseForm in the admin > add/change views of the newforms admin branch. [1] It seems to me that > it would also be useful to override the actual Form object, and to do > so based on information in

Re: [Changeset] r6097 - django/trunk/django/http

Russell, On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 08:36 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Author: russellm > Date: 2007-09-11 08:36:09 -0500 (Tue, 11 Sep 2007) > New Revision: 6097 > > Modified: >django/trunk/django/http/__init__.py > Log: > Fixed #5318 -- Added __contains__ method to HttpRequest, mirroring ex

Re: [Changeset] r6097 - django/trunk/django/http

On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 22:06 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On 9/11/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > This change caught my eye going past. > > > > Do you think it's a good idea to have foo.has_key('blah') and "&

Re: newforms: custom error messages

On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 03:34 +, SmileyChris wrote: [...] > PS: I'm no internationalization expert, but ugettext_lazy wasn't in > __all__ of django.utils.translation.__init__ so I had to add it in to > use it. I'm not overlooking something, am I? Well, you are and you aren't. You don't need to

Re: [Proposal] i18n blocktrans semantics & syntax change

On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 23:10 +0200, Tomas Kopecek wrote: > Hi, > I've implemented blocktrans in slightly different syntactical/semantical > manner. Look at the following examples: > > {% blocktrans %} > text {{var}} > {{var|filter}} > {% endblocktrans %} > > and plural variant: > > {% b

Re: ATTN Malcolm: Autoescaping

On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 12:09 +0200, Michael Radziej wrote: > Hi Malcolm, > > I'd like to work a bit on the Autoescaping patch at the sprint (adding > newforms handling, selftests for newforms). Do you have any new stuff for it > or any comments? Or would you like to do it yourself? I'll send you

Re: [Proposal] i18n blocktrans semantics & syntax change

On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 14:02 +0200, Tomas Kopecek wrote: [...] > I think that blocktrans in its current state is more obstacle than > helper for me and introduces lot of quite unnecessary code. Furthermore > I see priority in usability and simplicity for designers than for > translators. Well r

Re: [Proposal] i18n blocktrans semantics & syntax change

On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 11:09 +0200, Michael Radziej wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 14:02 +0200, Tomas Kopecek wrote: > > [...] > > > I think that blocktrans in its current state is more obstacle than > >

Re: copy.deepcopy for newforms' Bug ?

On Sat, 2007-09-15 at 11:00 +0800, 张沈鹏(电子科大08年本科应届) wrote: > When I checkout django from svn , this error happened , it seems come from > #6154 > > .. > File > "D:\myWay\stuhome_django\sdk\python\Lib\site-packages\django\newforms\forms.py" > in __init__ > 76. self.fields = sel

Re: copy.deepcopy for newforms' Bug ?

On Sat, 2007-09-15 at 16:17 +0800, 张沈鹏(电子科大08年本科应届) wrote: > I tried to open a ticket , but the Trac detected an internal error > when I try to append the attachment . Trac doesn't like binary uploads (like zip files). Still, thanks for putting together such a small example. I'll be able to do s

Re: #2465 - Make select_related() related work for ForeignKeys with null=True

On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 00:36 +, Rob Hudson wrote: > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2465 > > I'm running into this and it makes sense to me that select_related > should do this right. I'm curious of Adrian's comment about this > involving a bunch of LEFT JOINs and why that's a bad thing?

Re: Heads-up: doing a bit of triage work

On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 15:34 -0500, James Bennett wrote: > On 9/16/07, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > s/would/will/ -- I'm gonna try to have this wrapped up in the next couple > > days. > > Cool. I've paused for a bit of a break, but here's some info on what > I've been doing. >

Re: Django is slower after changeset [6333]

On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 11:21 -0700, msaelices wrote: > I created a ticket for it. Ticket is: > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5513 > > After more than one hour of profiling, I found the problem. It creates > a session for every request. > > I've attached patch on ticket: > http://code.djang

Re: Allow bypassing validation in newforms (#5153)

On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 00:23 +0200, Christopher Lenz wrote: > Hey all, > > I've created a ticket which has been closed as wontfix, and was told > to bring it here. So here I am. > > I'm somewhere between -0 and -1 on this, for a couple of reasons.

Re: Allow bypassing validation in newforms (#5153)

On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 10:14 +0200, Christopher Lenz wrote: > Am 17.09.2007 um 04:17 schrieb Malcolm Tredinnick: > > On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 00:23 +0200, Christopher Lenz wrote: > >> Hey all, > >> > >> I've created a ticket which has been closed as wontfi

Re: Better newforms metaclassing

On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 07:15 +, SmileyChris wrote: > In regards to http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5050, Malcolm said: > > This needs some django-dev discussion.[...] > > I also feel a bit suspicious about the design. Both Form and > BaseForm end up with the same root metaclass (because >

Re: Allow bypassing validation in newforms (#5153)

On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 19:11 +1000, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 10:14 +0200, Christopher Lenz wrote: [...] > > Um, yes they are erased: > > > ><http://code.djangoproject.com/browser/django/trunk/django/ > > newforms/forms.py#L205>

Re: 0.96.1 / 096-bugfixes

On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 12:47 +, Philippe Raoult wrote: > I was wondering why there is no 096-bugfixes branch. Does that reflect > a policy change since previous versions ? Well, the policy is that the -bugfixes branch was for security fixes only. We haven't had to do a security release yet for

Re: A thought about temples and escaping

On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 05:22 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi all. I'll first state that I'm not a django developer (my only > patch was rejected and that's sad, cause I've learned python only to > make it :( ). Yet I like django, I have started to work with it, for > some experiments, and came

Re: #4796 - Needs an expert's eye.

On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 22:43 +, Andrew Durdin wrote: > I was looking into #4796, and submitted a patch that fixes the error > -- and I'm fairly sure that it fixes it in the appropriate spot. > However, I didn't quite grok the runtime interaction between the > __proxy__ objects and the delayed_l

Re: trunk broken since [6402]

On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 09:17 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On 9/22/07, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > > BTW, wouldn't it be nice (TM) if new commits first went to side branch and > > only get committed to trunk after the buildbot has given green light? I have > > no idea i

Re: Discussion for #5446

On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 01:35 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Ticket 5446 discusses some ideas for putting more international > country data into Django. The ticket is here - > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5446 > > The last comment is a request to bring to this list for comment. So, > h

Re: force_unicode(strings_only) and DateTime objects

On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 01:24 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been looking at #5553 [1] tonight; it looks to be a good patch to > fix some Datetime serialization issues that have arisen recently. > > [1] http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5553 > > It's a fairly small change

Re: #4796 - Needs an expert's eye.

On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 04:31 -0700, Andrew Durdin wrote: [...] > I'm confident now that the patch is correct, as I now understand why > it works: > > string_concat returns a __proxy__ that will call _string_concat when > __unicode__ is called, so we expect _string_concat to return a unicode > inst

Re: trunk broken since [6402]

On Sun, 2007-09-23 at 12:50 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: [..] > Another approach would be to only send the failure message to the > committer that stimulated the build. i.e., you break it, you get a > nastygram in your inbox :-) Whilst well intentioned, this tends not to work for community-o

Re: distinct by default?

On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 15:05 +0200, Thomas Güttler wrote: > Hi, > > it is suprising, that > MyModel.objects.filter() > does not use distinct by default. If you use related tables and OR, > you get the same object returned several times. > > Why not enable distinct() by default? It's a lo

Re: Regression tests for localflavor

On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 11:08 -0700, Marc Garcia wrote: > Hi! > > I know that it's probably a newbie question, but I'm not sure how I've > to make regression tests to a new localflavor that I've developed. > > I've seen that there is a test file for every localflavor in .../trunk/ > tests/regressi

Re: Regression tests for localflavor

On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 15:06 -0400, Leo Soto M. wrote: > On 10/2/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 11:08 -0700, Marc Garcia wrote: > > > > > > Also, I've seen that there is another test file where all t

Re: Oracle slicing and backend refactor

On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 18:45 +0700, Ben Ford wrote: > Hi there, > > I've just been looking at some of django's internals trying to get my > head round the backend refactor... > > I seem to have no luck slicing oracle flavoured QuerySets. From > reading the source it seems that the limit_offset_sq

Re: models.NullBooleanField()

On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 14:30 +0300, Peter Nixon wrote: > Hi Guys > > It turns out that setting a field to "models.NullBooleanField(blank=True, > null=True,)" causes all sorts of bad things to happen as Django tries to > insert '' into boolean fields... I know that NullBooleanField should > prob

Re: typeo in trunk/django/utils/translation/trans_null.py

On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 14:43 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > overplus '"' is exist Please file bug reports in Trac, rather than sending them to the list. Otherwise they will just be forgotten. Thanks, Malcolm --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message bec

Re: Reason for autoindexes_primary_keys?

On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 10:51 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote: > On 10/3/07, Nis Jørgensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While looking through the db-backend settings, I found > > autoindexes_primary_keys. This seems to be True for all other backends > > than mysql and mysql_old. > > > > The only place in t

Re: QueryDict.update : should it support MultiValueDict?

On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 09:35 +0200, Gábor Farkas wrote: > Hi, > > before the unicode-change, QueryDict.update handled also updating from a > MultiValueDict (where on a key there might be several values) correctly. > > but now it does not support it correctly, > > so if you are updating a QueryD

Re: Still no favicon - Re: Visual recognition of Django website

On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 06:05 -0700, Mikkel Høgh wrote: > If no one is against this, why hasn't anything happened yet? > If Jacob, or anyone else, is against it, I wish they would step > forward and say so. Perhaps even argue as to why. This is now just getting rude. There are over 700 open bugs.

Re: Changes to request_response have broken django-rest-interface

On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 18:10 +0300, Peter Nixon wrote: > I tried to open the following ticket but it thinks my IP is a spammer, so I > am sending to the list: > > http://django-rest-interface.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/django_restapi/resource.py > > tries to set "request.method = 'POST'" in order

Re: Decoration and aliasing

On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 15:15 -0500, Jeremy Dunck wrote: [...] > Is there any interest in a patch that modifies Django's built-in > decorators to use functools.wraps in order to preserve things like > view function doc strings? Definitely interest from me. It's a bit of a bug at the moment that we

Re: Changes to request_response have broken django-rest-interface

On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 16:17 +0300, Peter Nixon wrote: > On Thu 04 Oct 2007, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 18:10 +0300, Peter Nixon wrote: > > > I tried to open the following ticket but it thinks my IP is a spammer, > > > so I am sending to the list

Re: QuerySet Refactoring

On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 21:23 +, David Cramer wrote: > Any chance of a status update? There are a few very small changes uncommitted in my local tree. I'm currently travelling and only a few hours to work on it. You can see the status by looking at the branch updates, though. Malcolm --~--

Re: Changes to request_response have broken django-rest-interface

On Sat, 2007-10-06 at 18:49 +0200, David Larlet wrote: [..] > I use django-rest-interface too and I have this bug which need to be > quickly fixed so I submitted a patch which need review on #5682, let > me know if I need to do something else. I will add a patch for > modpython too when this one

Re: Changes to request_response have broken django-rest-interface

On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 02:39 +0200, David Larlet wrote: > 2007/10/6, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I had a quick read of it. Looks like you're on the right track. > > Thanks for your reactivity. > > > > > The main problem I see

Re: Changes to request_response have broken django-rest-interface

On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 11:16 -0400, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: [...] > There are a lot of cases that Andreas' work doesn't cover, since REST is > a very broadly applicable theory. That was one of the challenges of the > project: working out what areas needed help and where we wou

Re: typecast_date() argument format

On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 15:30 +, jv wrote: > Hello all. > > I wonder if the function typecast_date() on /usr/lib/python2.5/site- > packages/django/db/backends/util.py:58 assumes the string 's' to be of > '-MM-DD' format. > > Here's the function in question (as of r6460): > > def typecast_

django-rest-api use [was Re: Changes to request_response have broken django-rest-interface]

On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 20:02 +0400, Ivan Sagalaev wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > As soon as > > you start to move to situations where your publically exposed resources > > don't map more or less one-to-one onto models, things become a lot > > trickier

Re: typecast_date() argument format

On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 16:02 +, jv wrote: > I'm using sqlite3, where dates seem to be saved as bitstrings. So, > when loading a date I get an error like > > ValueError: invalid literal for int() with base 10: > '07T14:07:32.06' > > The actual date in the DB being > > '2007-10-07T14:07:3

Re: Adding a hook for pre-runtime setup (ticket #5685)

On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 09:15 -0400, Benjamin Slavin wrote: > On 10/8/07, Andrew Durdin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, that looks like it'll be great for registering listeners (except > > perhaps for pre/post_save/delete). > > I had overlooked the handling of these signals. They could arguab

Re: Adding a hook for pre-runtime setup (ticket #5685)

On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 11:45 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: > Two things. > > The preruntime hook is a pretty good idea. Something to think about > though is providing a way to add callbacks to this hook that is > independant of settings.py. Otherwise 3rd party apps that want the > functionality would r

Re: Expanding the flexibility of URL resolution

Hey Marty, I can cheat a little bit here because I've thought about this a lot in the past. So this is slightly more than just a shot from the hip, despite the quick response time. This is all very hypothetical, because I've only ever done thought experiments here. You'll want to get feedback fr

Re: how practically to extend your models?

On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 02:18 -0700, Ilya Semenov wrote: > I'm one of those who participated in ticket #2145 discussion. I must > admit you have the most sane and comprehensive opinion I ever heard on > the 1-to-1 problem. Completely agreed on the every point.. And no, I > don't see any other way on

Re: how practically to extend your models?

On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 22:12 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > > I am following the discussion in the ticket > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2145, > and I think its not correct place to discuss theoretical things in > ticket, instead discussion should be moved to a Groups (to eith

Re: how practically to extend your models?

On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 06:47 -0700, Tai Lee wrote: > ForeignKey with unique=True does work and is the same at the SQL > level, but OneToOneField does have a couple of niceties attached to it > like adding the related object as an attribute to the model containing > the OneToOneField. If those could

Re: Proposal: form_for_model exclude_fields

On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 20:47 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On 10/13/07, Joseph Kocherhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'd like to add an 'exclude_fields' keyword argument to > > form_for_model, etc. exclude_fields would be a list of field names > > that should be excluded from the form

Question about queryset's iterator behaviour

Question for the Django Ancient Ones.. In current trunk's QuerySet.__iter__ method we do: return iter(self._get_data()) and _get_data() is basically (module some caching checks): return list(self.iterator()) Now, iterator() really is an iterator. So the effect of all t

Is currency obj.delete() behaviour slightly broken?

In trunk, if you call obj.delete() where 'obj' is a model instance, the post_delete signal is emitted whilst 'obj' still has a primary key value set, even though it's already been deleted from the database. Interestingly, we also test for this behaviour (in modelstests/signals/models.py). So it ma

<    7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   >