On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On Jun 1, 1:43 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> > Just as a bike-shedding thought: Would it be possible to have
>> > frank.events.confirmed.all() as the syntax? I see this a tiny bit
>> > cleaner. On
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> ...
>>> Candidate.context('site') would return a manager depending on the
>
Hi all,
Following the BDFL pronouncement of a preferred option for
customisable User models in contrib.auth [1], I've just pushed a
branch to Github that contains a draft implementation [2].
It's not ready for trunk quite yet, but you can use this code to set
up a custom User model, and then log
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On Jun 4, 6:12 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> * The swapping mechanic is set up using a new Meta option on models
>> called 'swappable' that defines the setting where an alternate model
>> can be d
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> Understood & agreed (the "this model is dynamic made explicit" part
> seems really important specifically).
>
> I am afraid of the hard-coding of meta.swappable must be 'SOME_VAR'
> which then references settings.SOME_VAR, and that this is
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On Jun 7, 11:57 am, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wednesday, June 6, 2012 4:32:02 PM UTC+2, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
>>
>> > Still, yet another API idea: [snip]
>>
>> Then, Model.__new__ will replace the SwappableUser class with
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 8 kesä, 02:43, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>> > - For documentation: It should be suggested that the example MyUser
>> > should define class Meta: swappable = 'AUTH_USER_MODEL'. Otherwise it
>> >
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 8 kesä, 13:43, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>> That's certainly an interesting use case. However, I can think of at
>> least 2 ways it could be mitigated.
>>
>> One way would be to treat this as part of t
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 14 kesä, 13:35, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> I've made some improvements (in my view) to the DjangoTestSuiteRunner. I
>> got tired of having to remember my test class names and of typing so much:
>>
>> ./manage.py test binder.BinderTest.te
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins
wrote:
> I'm only lightly involved in the project, but there is some misinformation
> going around about it.
>
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Daniel Greenfeld wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We evaluated django-nonrel for use in projects and looked ag
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Meshy wrote:
> Perhaps it's just me, but I've very rarely wanted a SlugField that wasn't
> unique. Would this not be a sensible default? I realise that a lot of apps
> will rely upon this default, but objectively speaking would this not be
> better? Perhaps this ch
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 7:33 PM, bhuztez wrote:
> Django makes assumptions about the filesystem layout of python
> packages here and there, and will silently skip any app which does not
> meet Django's assumptions without raise up any warning. I had been
> bitten by this many times before I learne
Hi Sachin,
Django-Developers is a forum for discussing the development of Django
itself, not for general user queries. General user queries should be
posted to Django-users. You should also refrain from posting the same
question to both lists.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:44 PM
Hi Anand,
I can only assume you're really excited about this blog post, but please:
1) Don't cross post. Pick the right list, and post once.
2) Don't post things like this to Django-developers. This is a list
for discussing the development of Django itself.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Tue, Jul 1
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Piotr Grabowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It is time to midterm evaluation of my participation in gsoc so I want to
> summarize in this check-in what I have done in last month.
> https://gist.github.com/3085250 - here is something that can be
> "documentation". I wrote some
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> I was poking around in our (Votizen's) use of signals and thinking
> about making some tooling so that signal usage was a bit more
> transparent.
>
> In doing so, I noticed that GenericForeignKey hooks the model pre_init
> signal. It does th
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Eric Floehr wrote:
> I'd like to open up a discussion on the possibilities of having a way to
> optionally specifying not to create operator indexes on CharField's when
> db_index=True. Based on the consensus from this discussion, I'll open up a
> ticket and if it
Hi Christopher,
The process from here:
1) You convince someone else in the community to review your patch
2) They look at the patch, and mark it Ready for Checkin; or, they
give you feedback, and you go back to step 1
3) Someone on the core team commits the patch.
The "someone else" for ste
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 4:58 AM, charettes wrote:
> I think this will only be an issue for django application maintainers.
>
> IMHO, projects target a specific version of python and won't have to provide
> python 2-3 compatibility. Am I wrong?
Yes and no.
On the one hand -- yes. Jo(sephin)e Publ
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 5:26 AM, dffdgsdfgsdfhjhtre wrote:
> https://github.com/zacharyvoase/django-boss
> http://blog.zacharyvoase.com/2009/12/09/django-boss/
>
> What is the outlook of something like this replacing the current way
> management commands are handled by django? I'm no the author of
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Florian Apolloner
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Sunday, August 12, 2012 2:22:58 AM UTC+2, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>
>> I'll agree that it looks appealing. However, as always, my question is
>> about backwards compatibility.
&g
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
> On 13-8-2012 1:54, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
>> In my view, the current largest source of boilerplate with management
>> commands is where they have to be, you have to stick them 3 directories
>> deep. Writing a command itself is pretty boilerpl
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:26 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> I'd like to move all Django localflavor code into a separate package,
> distributed separately from Django the framework.
+1. I've had the exact same thought myself over the past couple of
years. My hesitation historically has been the lim
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:26 AM, Adrian Holovaty
>> wrote:
>> > PROPOSED SOLUTION
>> >
>> > I think it m
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Victor Hooi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm just wondering, has there been any updates on the User model refactor?
>
> My understanding is that this is the official way of handling Users going
> forward.
>
> Is there any roadmap on when it might hit trunk? I didn't see any r
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
> I believe changes to auth (and several other things) are waiting for
> contrib.migrations. It will be some time...
Incorrect. The strategy that was approved for trunk won't require
migrations unless you want to change an existing project, whic
The problem is that we aren't in a position to guarantee that we have
the resources to do this all the time. Rather than set the formal
expectation that the 5-for-1 deal will always be available, I'd rather
keep it as a "Sale now on!" feature that a core developer can announce
when they find themse
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Victor Hooi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm just wondering, has there been any updates on the User model refactor?
>>
>> My understanding is that this is the official
Hi,
Thanks for the report -- if you want to make sure this isn't
forgotten, you should open a ticket and describe the fix you think
needs to be made. Reporting to the mailing list is helpful, but is
just as likely to get lost in someone's inbox.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 9:45
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
> Is there anyone else out there who doesn't like having to import models from
> app X into app Y just so that app Y can connect post save signals to them?
I can't say the need to import models to set up a signal has ever
caused me any difficulty.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:16 PM, sergzach wrote:
> The question about databases.
>
> Do I understand correctly that if we create a MyUser class (as in your
> example) then extra fields (e.g. date_of_birth) will be stored in the same
> table of a database with inherited fields (from AbstractBaseUs
Hi Piotr,
Thank you so much for your efforts over the summer.
I'd also like to apologise for my lack of communication; I certainly
haven't been a model mentor over the course of the program.
Although we may not have achieved all the goals we set out to achieve
at the start of the program, I don'
Hi all,
So, I've been working on a Django branch [1] to implement the approach
to pluggable user models that was decided upon earlier this year [2]
[1] https://github.com/freakboy3742/django/tree/t3011
[2] https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/ContribAuthImprovements
The user-swapping code itself
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Aymeric Augustin
wrote:
> On 25 août 2012, at 10:15, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
>> We *could* just mark the affected tests that require auth.User as
>> "skipUnless(user model == auth.User)", but that would mean some
>> proj
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:11 AM, peter wrote:
> I opened this ticket (https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/18823) on the
> Trac but thought i'd bring it up here to increase the likelihood of it
> getting noticed. In short things don't quite work right when you have a m2m
> field that uses a throu
ll()
>
> It's not exactly a real world example though i think it demonstrates that
> data loss is a possibility.
>
> Monday, August 27, 2012 5:33:03 PM UTC-7, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:11 AM, peter wrote:
>> > I opened th
I'm in complete agreement with Alex. -1 from me. Explicit is better
than implicit, and to my mind, hiding imports just complicates the
learning curve associated with Django's package tree.
If you *really* want this, there are hooks into ipython et al that can
do this; I don't see it as something a
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:01 PM, ptone wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, August 25, 2012 5:32:08 PM UTC-7, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Aymeric Augustin
>> wrote:
>> > On 25 août 2012, at 10:15, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>>
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Klaas van Schelven
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm not really ready to post this as a bug, please help me correct any
> possible misunderstandings before I do so.
>
> I was gently pushed towards the future url template tag due to my
> screen filling up with DeprecationWa
… and this is exactly why the app-refactor has been a topic of
discussion for several years. Hopefully we'll get a chance to thrash
out some of the details this week at DjangoCon US; I know Preston (who
has been working on the patch of late) is keen to discuss what he's
done.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
Hi all,
The implementation of custom User models is now ready for final
review, prior to commit to trunk.
The code is available in my Github repo, in the t3011 branch.
https://github.com/freakboy3742/django/tree/t3011
The diff is available here:
https://github.com/freakboy3742/django/compare/m
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 15 syys, 15:34, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The implementation of custom User models is now ready for final
>> review, prior to commit to trunk.
>>
>> The code is availa
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 15 syys, 18:59, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote:
>> With the above commits I can do this:
>>
>> class MyUser(AbstractUser):
>> employee_no = models.CharField(max_length=5)
>> some_other_field = models.TextField(null=True, blank=True)
>>
ddress the feedback received to date
Based on the feedback on the patch so far, it looks like we're on
track to merge this later this week.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
> wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen
wrote:
> On 16 syys, 02:15, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
> Creating an admin class for no-added-fields extended user model is
> somewhat straightforward, although the admin forms currently assume
> the auth.User as the base user.
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Ben Slavin wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
> First, let me apologize for being a bit late to the party on this. If
> there's been prior discussion of any of the points below kindly tell me to
> get stuffed and so shall I do.
You asked for it… :-)
> Our team has been working
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
> Developer of a pet shop software adds:
>
> feed_before_midnight = models.BooleanField()
>
> because they're planning on carrying baby gremlins... forgets to update the
> zoological XML feed importer to use the "feed_before_midnight" value, and
> t
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:24 PM, maxi wrote:
>
>
> El martes, 25 de septiembre de 2012 09:05:47 UTC-3, Karen Tracey escribió:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:15 PM, maxi wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> DatabseFeatures class has a supports_transactions property for test if
>>> the db engine support t
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote:
> So, the patch [1] is looking alright, but after some consideration I think
> it's going to be best to leave this until just after the 1.5 branch has
> happened and then merge it in as part of the 1.6 cycle.
>
> My reasoning is thus:
>
> - Th
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> Have I missed part of the discussion here? At DjangoCon, South was
>> still going to exist (as the "smarts" part of the problem) -- has th
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:14 PM, rizumu wrote:
>
> It is great to see this merged, it has been a long time coming. :)
>
> I would like to add backwards compatibility to some apps and I'm looking for
> a recommended technique. Could the following, or a better option, find its
> way into the docs in
Hi James,
Thanks for the submission. Two quick points:
1) As we describe in our contributors guide, there's no need to post
a message to django-dev letting us know you've opened a ticket. Trac
has plenty of triggers and notifications to let people know about new
tickets, including an email feed
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Andy Dustman wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:24 PM, maxi wrote:
>>> No, I just answer because it caught my attention. Why not just trust in a
>>> True/False pro
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:
> Why does every conversation about Django's performance met with "GTFO we
> don't care"? (that was a rhetorical question :).
Ok - If this is where the conversation is starting, it's going to go
downhill *very* fast.
Consider this a warning to *e
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We've been talking about moving django.contrib.localflavor into
> separate packages, outside of Django proper
> (https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/OiyEGmXTifs/discussion).
> Today I did the work of creating the
Hi Tim,
Both of these are looking really good. I've left some comments on the
tickets, mostly fairly minor suggestions.
Russ %-)
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Tim Graham wrote:
> Thank-you for the feedback, guys. I've updated the patch based on
> suggestions, so if you are interested, pleas
Hi Matt,
I'm not aware of any community maintained solution for this. However,
interestingly, what you've suggested (including some contextual stack
information in a query comment) is something that was suggested by Cal
Henderson at the very first DjangoCon.
I'm not sure Ned's "global request obj
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This one stung me today. Basically as part of an event (calendar) app, I
> have functionality for splitting a series of events into two at a given
> timestamp. The details aren't particularly relevant, but the key thing is
> that
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Ludwig Kraatz wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
>
>>
>> > - The last_login field is in the AbstractBaseUser, but it isn't
>> > documented as a required field. Is this field required for something?
>> > Is it needed as part of AbstractBaseUser?
>>
>> Yes, last_login is require
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Jan Bednařík wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm using Django for more than four years and last week I started
> contributing.
>
> In docs about contributing I didn't find how detailed should be my testing
> while I'm writing or reviewing patch? Is enough to run tests only fo
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Dominic Rodger wrote:
> Another long time user here (at some point I'd love to make the jump to
> contributor, just need to find more time) - out of interest, is there a
> reason we don't use Travis? I wonder if that might help those with commit
> access, since pre
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it surely won't change in 1.5 since we already released an alpha.
>
> That's incorrect -- it's still possible. Alpha is the freeze for "big"
features. Little features can still be added up till the release of the
beta. A minor enha
Hi Lee,
What you propose certainly sounds reasonable -- anything that reduces the
exposure of valid accounts to an external source is a good thing, IMHO.
Did you have an alternative wording to suggest? If you do, please open a
ticket.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Lee Tr
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
> > If anyone has any major objections to the deprecation of depth, you
> should
> > shout now. If there are no objections and people think it's ok to push
> this
> > deprecation in now,
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Kee wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was generating a lagrge table with django and wondered why response is
> so slow (it has ~ 2000 x 10), so I rewrote
> profiled ``floatformat`` and ``intcomma`` and wrote down their
> implementations using builtin functions only.
>
> Take
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Jordan Hagan wrote:
> As it seems that there is no longer any real opposition to this ticket (if
> there is, now would be the time to speak up) I'll go ahead and prepare a
> patch against the current trunk and get it uploaded to trac and see where
> we get to from
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Jordan Hagan wrote:
> I'm sorry if I came across that way, that wasn't my intention at all.
> Andre Terra who was the one to initially raise opposition has changed his
> stance on the functionality since he first posted, as per his email 4 days
> ago. Aside from hi
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:59 AM, ionel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to make a custom user model so I can login and register
> with the email (instead of username). This means the email must become
> unique and I don't need the username fields. I don't want to fill it
> with random data, unique i
Hi Eric,
Although the full stack trace would confirm it, I think I can guess what
the problem is here -- it's the mechanism for generating reset tokens.
If you dig into the token generation (and reversal) mechanisms, they use
int_to_base36 and base36_to_int to convert the user's primary key into
Ok - so, I've been following this thread, and I should probably shed some
light on the other side of the decision making process.
I've got a history with Mixins. I was responsible for the final commit of
Django's class-based views, which are very mixin heavy… and haven't been
universally well rece
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Diederik van der Boor wrote:
>
> Op 7 nov. 2012, om 17:49 heeft Aaron Merriam het volgende geschreven:
>
> I wanted to post and modified version of a gist posted earlier in this
> thread.
>
> https://gist.github.com/4032482
>
> I originally implemented the original
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Chi Ho Kwok wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> I've noticed that after upgrading to Django 1.4, __in queries really don't
> like empty sets. Simple queries still work, like
> User.objects.filter(groups__in=[]), but most failures I've seen are with
> Paginators. I think this is
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Aaron Merriam wrote:
> Without setting request, args, and kwargs on on the view instance (which
> is done during the base dispatch view), anything in the view that assumes
> these values are present cannot run.
>
> Most of my views end up with functions which retrie
#x27;t give you a good reason for it, it just feels bad every
> time I do it. The only way to work around this is to override dispatch
> without calling the original, and essentially duplicate the original
> dispatch method with an init call added in.
>
> Cheers,
> Jordan
>
> On F
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:57 AM, Christian Jensen
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has anyone run into an issue where dumpdata refers to the old auth model
> and tries to dump its data?
>
> Here is what I am encountering:
>
> DEBUG 2012-11-09 11:49:46,363 util 8457 140488053692160 (0.002) SELECT
> "auth_user"."id
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Val Neekman wrote:
> OK, I went back and looked at Django 1.5 again. (New Custom User Model)
>
> Here is what I think: (User Django 1.4 as base)
>
> 1. Rename username to userid and increase the length to 255 chars while
> keeping the rest of attribute the same (
I use a lot of AJAX in my projects as well.
However, it that doesn't mean that *Django* needs to include advanced AJAX
support.
I (and other members of the core team) have said this many times in the
past -- the Django community benefits when Django isn't a monolithic core.
>From a technical per
Hi Benoit,
Like I said in my last response, I'm *not* seeing the problem. Saying "I'm
seeing the problem" doesn't help me. Saying "I've got a custom User"
doesn't help me either -- I've got a custom User (several, actually - a
test case extending AbstractUser and one extending AbstractBaseUser, pl
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Santiago Basulto <
santiago.basu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey guys, i'm posting this here because I posted this on django-users
> yesterday and didn't get any help.
>
> I realise someone has now answered your question -- but *please* don't use
django-developers as "s
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:10 AM, James Pic wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> Thank you for your feedback. And pretty soon I will tackle this problem in
> an external app - or consider joining the party if somebody else has
> started, in this case feel free to let me know.
>
> I can understand most of
Hi Harry,
That particular page has been locked down due to problems we've had with
spam. If you let us know what you want to add, I can add an entry to the
list on your behalf.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Harry Percival
wrote:
> It's for promotional purposes really -
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the kind words. It's always nice to know when your efforts are
appreciated.
As for the suggestion about the error message -- that's sounds like a
reasonable idea to me; feel free to open a ticket. If you're looking to get
involved in the development of Django itself, this sho
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Django 1.5 beta 1 contains a regression for users who install Django or
> their projects under non-ASCII paths:
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19357 Unfortunately, the patch
> isn't
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Harry Percival wrote:
> Hi Russell, thanks for getting back to us. Here's our info:
>
>
Hi Harry,
I've just posted those updates, and done the cleanups you suggested.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gr
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ryan Stuart wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I recently discovered that there is no way in the Django template syntax
> to access all valid items of a dict. For example, as I understand it, it is
> impossible to access the only item of this dict:
>
> my_dict = {"_key": "value"
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Pedro J. Aramburu
wrote:
> Ramiro, I've read the ticket but it seems stuck. I just want it to go
> forward because I think it's a major UI/UX issue for non-programmers the
> lack of "pretty" app names. But I want it to be done right with a proper
> app metadata hand
to find it.
>
> On Friday, December 7, 2012 10:41:16 PM UTC-3, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Pedro J. Aramburu
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ramiro, I've read the ticket but it seems stuck. I just want it to go
>>> forward
Hi Gavin,
Unfortunately, the deadline for new features in Django 1.5 has passed; once
we release a beta, we only accept bug fixes.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Gavin Wahl wrote:
> I know this is last minute, but is there any chance of getting this change
> in 1.5? It'
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Travis Swicegood wrote:
> Is there a wiki page on the admin and changes that are planned for it?
> This comes up every few months with a "hey, I've done X with the admin,
> can we just use it to replace/update contrib.admin?" Would be nice to have
> everyone's (
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Amirouche B. wrote:
> Héllo,
>
> Everything is in the title. Does Django core dev's want to have localized
> documentation in main repository or should it be managed by local DUG ?
>
Yes :-)
In a perfect world, you'd be able to get documentation in other langua
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Skylar Saveland
wrote:
> I checked out 1.5 branch today and found a change that I can't find the
> debate/announcement for: e-mail to email in
>
> django/core/validators.py:validate_email = EmailValidator(email_re,
> _('Enter a valid email address.'), 'invalid')
>
Agreed - a --color command line flag makes more sense to me, and a lot more
sense than a setting. I *might* be able to be convinced about an
environment variable too (since the environment variable DJANGO_COLORS is
already used to set the palette), but frankly, Alex Gaynor's argument about
this bei
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On Sunday, December 23, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Florent Gallaire wrote:
>
> Django ORM should work for SQL and NoSQL DBMS.
> NoSQL integration in Django is a more interesting and needed subject,
> but who cares about that in the core team ?
>
> Why
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 26, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>
> Why? Because we've gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure this sort of
> thing is at least theoretically possible.
>
> Although we
Hi Mary,
The Django-Developers mailing list is for managing the development of
Django itself. If you have a job offer/RFP that you want to fill, you
should be mailing the Django *Users* mailing list.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 7:01 AM, wrote:
> Hello,
>
>Cascade Bicycle
Hi Hiroki,
Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm afraid I don't see the benefit of doing
this as configuration, rather than something in the dispatched method
itself. Using your gist as an example -- why should this be something
defined in a custom dispatching configuration format, rather than simply
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Hiroki Kiyohara wrote:
> Hi, Russ.
>
> Thanks for your reply.That makes sense.I notice that the configuration of
> my suggestion is complex.
> We need to know what the configuration to take the value.It is necessary
> to re-consider the implementation.
>
> Advantag
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Malcolm Box wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When creating self.client in TestCase, it would be very useful if the
> testcase instance was passed to the client.
>
> I'm using a replacement client class that does various validation checks,
> so wants to use assert* functions on Tes
I'm not aware of a ticket for this issue, and I couldn't find one from a
quick search, so feel free to open one. The approach described by the OP
seems reasonable, so if you want to provide a patch as well, feel free.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Chris Proto wrote:
> D
Sure - sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me. Feel free to open a
ticket and provide a patch!
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Gabriel Warshauer-Baker
wrote:
> As Luke Plant pointed out a few years ago, you *can* just do:
>
> def serialize_one_object_to_json(**obj):
>
1201 - 1300 of 2850 matches
Mail list logo
