Re: tests failing/throwing errors - not sure where to start

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:13 PM, VernonCole wrote: > Kris: > 9 failures and 17 errors are not an unusual number (out of 556 tests) > given the complexity of django and the number of platforms it works on. > The number and selection of failed tests will vary depending on the exact > implementat

Re: AutoField issue in SQLite3

Hi Leonardo, There's no magic hidden source of information about tickets - if there's information, it's the discussion on the ticket. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Leonardo Borges Avelino wrote: > > Hi folks! > > Any news about this ticket: https://code.djangoprojec

Re: [GSoC] Revamping validation framework and merging django-secure once again

Hi Chris, On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Christopher Medrela < chris.medr...@gmail.com> wrote: > 1. One of my questions left unanswered on the pull request [1] (I mean > this one > about documentation and `__str__` use.). > I've left a comment on the pull request, I've given the same comment i

Re: Django Trac ticket keywords

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Daniele Procida wrote: > Would there be any objection if I used a keyword ("afraid_to_commit" or > something) to mark tickets that I think would be suitable for first-time > committers doing the "Don't be afraid to commit" tutorial to tackle? > > That way I can pr

Re: Feature Request: Narrowing up choices in Django admin list_filter

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 30 août 2013, at 23:28, Mehran Kholdi wrote: > > > I propose the idea to narrow up the choices shown in list_filter, by > those available among the "current" queryset's results. > > Hi Mehran, > >

Re: Circular dependency in forms+views+models

I agree with Marc -- the fix here is that you should be using a named URL, not referencing the view directly. The circular dependency shouldn't exist - it should be broken by the dereferencing provided by the URL name. This is a feature that was added late in the development of Django (well… relati

Re: [GSoC] Revamping validation framework and merging django-secure once again

Hi Christopher, On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Christopher Medrela wrote: > 1. Progress: I've made improvements to admin checks. I've also finished > implementing filtering and silencing checks. I've rebased my branch against > master again. > > Excellent - I'll take look and get you some feedb

Re: [discussion] communication guidelines in django

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, Jorge Cardoso Leitao < jorgecarlei...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Django dev mailing list. > > The objective of this email is two-fold: > A: I want to share a book I've read about written communication. Since > communication in Django, and open source in general, is main

Re: Allowing custom attributes in Meta classes

On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > I'm not sure either way on this one. I don't want people to get carries > away with Meta, it's not a dumping ground for any old thing you like. That > said, for a developer of a third party library which extends the ORM, the > inability to ext

Re: GZipMiddleWare documentation

Here's a draft for inclusion right underneath the heading introducing GZipMiddleware .. admonition: Security researchers recently revealed that when compression techniques (including GZipMiddlware) are used on a website, a site becomes exposed to a number of possible attacks. These approaches c

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Abdulaziz Alfoudari < aziz.alfoud...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is a continuation of my post on > stackoverflow > . > > With the introduction of Django 1.5, it was possible to crea

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

on having > this implemented as a separate contrib application rather than including it > with django.contrib.auth > > On Thursday, September 12, 2013 5:41:29 PM UTC-6, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Abdulaziz Alfoudari < >

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

Hi all It's great to see this discussion is happening -- however, given that we're debating the merits of different architectural approaches, with the aim of presenting a single approach for final inclusion in Django master, it would be worthwhile formalising the discussion. This is something we'v

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > Russell, > I would *love* to do the work for the email-login analogue you describe. > I actually proposed just such a thing a few months ago but was rebuffed. > I'm sorry to hear this. Out of interest, did a member of the core team actuall

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > I added the authtools approach to the wiki for completion, although I > believe it to be an inferior approach. > > One thing I dislike is having a separate app (e.g. d.c.auth_email) that > has to be installed separately. That feels pretty i

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Aaron Merriam wrote: > Luke, I'm +1 on wanting a solution that allows "just set AUTH_USER_MODEL > to 'auth.EmailUser', and done". > > It'd be nice if 'swappable' could accomplish this for us. Something along > the lines of for any set of swappable models which are

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > The problem you've got here is how it knows to *not* install EmailUser. If > it's a model defined in d.c.auth.models, it will get installed, > irrespective of whether it is AUTH_USER_MODEL or not. This is where we have > to special case the ne

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

Hi Aaron. On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Aaron Merriam wrote: > Russell, my reply there isn't meant to be confrontational and yet > re-reading it I can see it being easily interpreted as such. > No worries - I didn't read your response as confrontational, but I'll make sure I continue to not d

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

Hi Bruno, On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Bruno Ribeiro da Silva < cont...@brunoribeiro.org> wrote: > Hi, I develop applications in Django and I started to read the developer > mailing list and got interested by this topic about MailUser problem and I > want to add my 50 cents, sorry if I'm taki

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

Hi Jorge, On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Jorge Cardoso Leitão wrote: > Hi all. > > I summarise the options with some of the issues raised, and I add my own > concern. > > > One option presented here is to have both models in d.c.auth. As pointed > out by Russell and others, this causes the pro

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > But Django already has the mechanism to know not to install the model. > It's the "swappable" Meta option. That is what causes User not to be > installed if it is not used (contra my initial statement yesterday; I was > flat wrong). > > Rig

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, wrote: > > Note that EmailUser *doesn't* have a Meta: swappable definition. There > is nothing on this model that says "I am swappable", or "I am an > appropriate substitute for User". > > Ah, this is were the misunderstanding was. authtools does actually set > s

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Sep 19, 2013, at 9:24 PM, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, wrote: > >> > Note that EmailUser *doesn't* have a Meta: swappable d

Re: FormSetView and ModelFormSetView

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > This is partly because there's no obvious correct implementation of them ;) > > Yes, I think these views should exist. But they go with the same body of > work as handling multiple forms, inline formsets etc. At present I have no > yet found t

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

Hi Gavin, On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:58 AM, wrote: > > The intention was to mark a particular model as a something that can be > replaced. > > It's hard to find the original rationale behind swappable, but my mental > model was always: > > A model with `swappable = 'x'` means that the model sh

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:43 AM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > > P. S. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes to social > things, so I want to state explicitly: I am continuing to debate the > question because I perceive the debate to be moving in a useful way. If > I'm, in fact, simply

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Timothy Anderegg < timothy.ander...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Luke - > > I just wanted to clarify the approach I'm using - The issue of whether or > not the EmailUser is in contrib.auth or in a new app contrib.auth_email is > a separate issue from code duplication. >

Re: System check framework

/pull/1364 > [2] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/django-developers/fEf21dtpqDE > > Here I would like to say thank you to my mentor, Russell Keith-Magee, who > gave > me a lot of advices, kept an eye at my project, did reviews and supported > me. > Preston Holmes also spe

Re: Performance Docs

Hi Alex, I'll had a look at one of Daniele's initial drafts of this document -- I don't remember if this point was in the draft I saw, but if it was, I'll certainly wear some of the blame for this getting committed if it was. Regardless - having had my attention drawn to it specifically, I'll agr

Re: Revert 165f44aa?

On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Florian Apolloner wrote: > > > On Saturday, September 21, 2013 7:50:34 PM UTC+2, Aymeric Augustin wrote: >> >> But whenever the with statement spills over two lines, which happens in a >> majority of cases, I find it worse than two with statements. It's >> especial

Re: Add strutctured settings module to django 1.7?

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:21 AM, VernonCole wrote: > I find myself using up lots of time and keystrokes explaining about the > benefits and methods of a structured settings module in django. > For example: > Using-a-Structured-Settings-environment

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > Good evening, Russell, et. al., > I had some time this afternoon. :-) Since there are already a couple of > reference implementations for how to do this with an e-mail app, I decided > to take a crack at an implementation that would include

Re: AbstractUser to get more abstract

Hi Rocky, On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Rocky Meza wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm another one of the authtools devs. > > On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:04:17 PM UTC-6, Luke Sneeringer wrote: >> >> Good evening, Russell, et. al., >> This is a problem that we ran into with authtools, what we ended up

Re: Permission to use some Django material ?

Hi Stanislas, Django is licensed under the terms of the BSD license. This means you can use any of Django's source code -- including images -- for whatever purpose, commercial or otherwise, as long as whatever you use is suitably attributed, and you don't make any claims that what you've done is e

Re: Django 1.6 release timeline

On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > Several release blockers were discovered over the last two weeks. > > Most were fixed, two are still open: > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/21197 > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/21164 > >

Re: Dynamic AUTH_USER_MODEL based on modules or routes

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Burak Emre Kabakcı wrote: > It would be nice if you allow using two different models for > django.contrib.auth module. The current User model is great for admin panel > users but in frontend it may become extra overhead for some cases. People > try to create another

Re: Dynamic AUTH_USER_MODEL based on modules or routes

se same same session tables, cookies etc. > > @Russell Keith-Magee Sorry, I couldn't understand what you mean in your > second paragraph. What I'm trying to do is exactly what you're suggesting, > in the example there is an app called "myapp" and I resolve the url

Re: Design discussion: admin alert messages

For the sake of completeness, it's worth pointing out two things: 1) "Color blindness" isn't a single medical condition. It's half a dozen different conditions, all with different colour distortions, ranging from mild colour spectrum distortion (Protanomaly, Deuteranomaly and Tritanomaly), to com

Re: Dynamic AUTH_USER_MODEL based on modules or routes

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Burak Emre Kabakcı wrote: > Again, thanks for the other alternatives. > > Today, I have worked with auth.backends.ModelBackend and it seems it would > be possible to separate user resources (like if the route namespace is > "myapp", then go with Customer table) if

Re: ImportError: cannot import name actions

Hi Rob, If you're able to generate a cyclic import error in 1.6b4, then that's definitely a release blocker. The first step is obviously to reproduce the bug. This isn't something I've seen in my testing, and that particular file (sites.py) hasn't changed in 5 months (at least, not in the 1.6 bra

Re: Backwards compatibility and field validation

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] < cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to understand why field validators (model.full_clean()) are > not called for model.save() > > I've spent about an hour reviewing all the discussions/replies

Re: Backwards compatibility and field validation

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] < cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote: > Sorry I should have made myself a little more clear. > > When I said "invalidating data inside your models" I was referring to any > previous data that was saved when the validator

Re: An argument against mark_safe.

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Jonathan Slenders < jonathan.slend...@gmail.com> wrote: > Currently, on python-ideas there is a discussion going on about taint > tracking in Python. It's tracking data that come from untrusted sources and > preventing it from being used in sensitive places. This v

Re: Possible idea for removing global state in Django.

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Jonathan Slenders < jonathan.slend...@gmail.com> wrote: > The global state problem is something that's been bothering me for a long > while, but after seeing a presentation of Alex Gaynor [1] from last year, I > started thinking about this again. > > The main probl

Re: Django logo usage terms self-contradiction

Hi Daniele, Thanks for the heads up. The first piece of text you've indicated predates the second, so it needed to be updated. I've just made the change. As for there being no Section 3.1 -- I'm not sure what you're referring to here. I can see a Section 3 that contains 2 subsections, numbered 1

Re: Creating a minimal custom user model. Seems last_login is required. Should it be?

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Tino de Bruijn wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Harry Percival > wrote: > >> I don't care about last_login! Can this be circumvented? Should that >> signal be optional, or gracefully handle the case where the user model has >> no last_login field?

Re: GSOC Tags

Hi Jasvir, Frankly -- if something like this has happened, it's because Melange (the software Google uses to run GSoC) is a complete mess. The fact that a Melange search for "Django" doesn't return "Django Software Foundation" is in no way surprising if you've spent any time actually using Melange

Re: How do features get decided for a release?

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Cody Scott wrote: > I know that I can look at the 1.7 release notes to see what is to come in > the next release. > > How do django developers decide what features to work on? > > Is there a minimum time between releases? > > Is there a minimum quota for fixed bug

Re: Model field metaclass magic (or lack thereof)

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:08 PM, schinckel wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if there was any reason why fields such as > models.DateField() do not use the SubFieldBase metaclass > trick to ensure they always contain instances of the correct > class? > > I'm referring to the description from > ht

Re: Flag Field Type Feature Request

Agreed - if we were going to implement this, we'd use a bit string implementation, not push it into a char field. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 4:22 AM, Michael Manfre wrote: > Storing bits as a string is not an efficient use of space and is slower to > query. Any reason why you

Re: Add a generic "getter" filter to the built-in library

On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Emanuele Bertoldi < emanuele.berto...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've opened a ticket (#21370) with a proposal for the *inclusion of a > generic "getter" filter* in the built-in library. > > *Why?* > > Well, because at the moment Django's template system really lacks of >

Re: djangoproject.org not resolving

On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 8:57 AM, wrote: > djangoproject.org does not redirect to djangoproject.com. The org domain > appears to be owned by the Django Software Foundation, and the > nameservers are the same as djangoproject.com. Is there a reason a > redirect is not setup? > Well, there will be a

Re: Should AdminSite be able to handle different namespace?

On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Florian Apolloner wrote: > Hi Vajrasky, > > > On Saturday, November 9, 2013 4:47:35 PM UTC+1, Vajrasky Kok wrote: >> >> While working on this ticket, I was pondering whether we should really >> fix this or not because one of the core developers said, >> > > Imo fix

Re: Should we care about performance in not-so-updated Python3 (Python 3.2)?

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Vajrasky Kok wrote: > Greetings, friends! > > We just added lru_cache in Django. > https://github.com/django/django/commit/9b7455e918a437c3db91e88dcbf6d9c93fef96f8 > > As you can see in django/utils/lru_cache.py, if Python is not shipped > with lru_cache (Python 3

Re: New suggestion: ignoring certain fields on INSERTs and UPDATEs

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Apostolos Bessas wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to ask, whether the following feature should/could be > part of Django. > > There are cases that you would the database to handle certain fields. > For instance, > > - set fields to their default value in the dabas

Re: Should AdminSite be able to handle different namespace?

On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote: > Hi Russ, > > > On Saturday, November 9, 2013 11:34:53 PM UTC+1, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: >> >> I'm a little concerned about this talk about deprecation here -- the >> app_name exists for a reason, a

Re: mod_python support

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Kamil Gałuszka wrote: > Hi ! > > I wanted to post this in old topic from 2010 but Google always gives me an > error on posting so I can't do that there. (soory for that!) > > I know that mod_python support was dropped long time ago but I think this > information s

Re: Improve annotation and aggregation

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Sagar Ghuge wrote: > Hi, > > I am planning to participate in GSOC 2014 and i would like to contribute > in Django as it is working on my area of interest that is Python. Is > anybody working on this project. Or can any one mentor me or Guide me > through this. I fo

Re: Enable longer wait in StoppableWSGIServer.shutdown / hardcoded parameter

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:52 AM, James Pic wrote: > Hi all, > > I found that there was a hard coded 2 seconds limit in > StoppableWSGIServer.shutdown: > https://github.com/django/django/blob/1.6/django/test/testcases.py#L999 > > This causes problems on slow boxes ie. travis: > https://travis-ci.

Re: Periodic Updates

Filling in some blanks here, because some people may not recognise who "Curtis Maloney" is - Curtis is FunkyBob on IRC, and was the recent winner of the Malcolm Tredinnick Memorial Prize [1]. He made the mistake of volunteering to do this on IRC, so we've taken him up on his offer :-) We've also s

Re: Wizard problem

Hi Olga, Yes - this is off topic. Django-developers isn't "second tier help" - it's a discussion forum for those developing Django itself. I'm sorry you haven't received a response on django-users; unfortunately, that's going to happen in a volunteer community. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Thu, Dec

Re: Django ORM support for NoSql databases

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:41 AM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 17 déc. 2013, at 20:38, Karen Tracey wrote: > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/0IuJssTt8tc/TxdXQ2D0thcJ > > > Interesting. Now I remember reading that message last year. I have t

Re: LiveServerTestCase, and override_settings(DEBUG=True)

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Harry Percival wrote: > Django's test runner overrides your settings to force DEBUG to be True, > which I understand the intention behind, but it is occasionally annoying. > One solution for those cases is to use `override_settings`, but that has > very weird effe

Re: Django ORM support for NoSql databases

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:18 AM, wrote: > > > On Tuesday, December 17, 2013 8:12:43 PM UTC-6, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: >> >> >> My claim is that complete abstraction of the data store shouldn't be the >> goal. What we should be aiming for is sufficient

Re: Django ORM support for NoSql databases

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:18 PM, > wrote: > > > > Wouldn't an easy (i.e. straightforward) solution be to add an Django > "ODM" > > that mirrors the ORM wherever it makes sense? This sounds pretty close > to > > your second soluti

Re: LiveServerTestCase, and override_settings(DEBUG=True)

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Harry Percival wrote: > Thanks gang. > > @Russell, I assume you meant set MEDIA_URL = "/media/" > Heh. Now we're even on really dumb typos :-) > That works if I do it in settings.py. Interestingly, it doesn't work if I > try and do it via override_settings? >

Re: SchemaEditor Enhancements

Trunk is still open for all 1.7 changes; 1.7 alpha is currently planned for mid January, which is the cutoff point for major API changes; the beta a month or so after that, which is the final cutoff for minor API changes. On top of that - it looks like you're proposing a modification to the schema

Re: Getting user's real IP address in Django

On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Val Neekman wrote: > Majority of the sites/apps built on Django *may* require user's real IP > address for tracking, prevention, verification and many other reasons. > > To get (guess) user's real IP address, one must check few META fields in a > particular order

Re: Saving deleted code from Django source code

HI Vajrasky, Django itself is licensed under the BSD license. This license allows you to produce derivative works, provided you comply with the terms of the BSD license. That means you can apply whatever *additional* terms you want, but the original copyright notice and attribution must also be pr

Re: App-loading reloaded - running code at startup

Hi Aymeric, First off - a *huge* thanks for all the work your doing on app reloading. I can't begin to express how much gratitude I have for the work you're doing here. On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > Hello, > > There’ve been lots

Re: Renaming apps.has_app

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 5 janv. 2014, at 22:27, Josh Smeaton wrote: > > > The only thing I have against it is that it may sound like it can take > an iterable of app names, where has_app() does not have that problem. > > W

Re: Migrations and swappable models/AUTH_USER_MODEL

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Andrew Godwin wrote: > So, the last major bug left in migrations that I'm aware of (bar the > completion of the GIS backends) is dealing with swappable models - in > particular, of course, AUTH_USER_MODEL. > > As long as you're not using any third-party apps, then

Re: Website integrated mobile app for disaster

Hi Akanksha, As Aymeric has said - this sounds like a great project, but it isn't appropriate for Django's Summer of Code program - we are looking for projects to work on and improve Django itself. You may want to try and get in contact with the Google Crisis Response team: http://www.google.org

Re: Website integrated mobile app for disaster

Hi Akanksha, We haven't started the GSoC process internally yet, so we haven't put together a collection of sample projects for this year; but if you want to see what we recommended last year, it's on our Wiki: https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/SummerOfCode2013 Out of those projects, the Valid

Re: Consider allowing customization of ModelForm's init parameters in contrib.admin

Is there some reason that you can't use get_form() for this? It would seem to be exactly what you are looking for - a way to control the instantiation of forms, used by both add_view and change_view. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 3:22 AM, tyrion-mx wrote: > I'd like to be able t

Re: CAS in cache framework

I can't see any reason that we *shouldn't* support it - it seems like a reasonable primitive to support. The only real issue is ensuring it either is, or can be, implemented on all backends and supported memcache libraries. If you can produce a patch that does this, I'd say it has a good chance of

Merging GSoC 2013 - Validation Refactor

Hi all, After a long delay, I'm finally ready to merge the result of Christopher Medrela's 2013 Summer Of Code Project - a refactor of Django's validate management command. A huge thanks to Christopher for his excellent work over the summer - he made my job as mentor very easy. For those that di

App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

Hi all, First off - this isn't critical for 1.7 alpha - I'm raising it now because I've been in this space for the last couple of days as a result of the working on the check framework. I suspect any changes stemming from this discussion can be landed in the beta period without major problems. Al

Re: App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 19 janv. 2014, at 08:56, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > > This is fine, but it limits the logic that we (as a project) can put into > AdminConfig.ready(), because existing pro

Re: App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

HI Marc, On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > All of your proposed solutions require trying to import an apps.py module > which may not exist. I know Aymeric was very much against this, especially > as python imports have potential side effects, and we don't know what > people m

Re: App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > For what it's worth, if we have some code that: > > a) is a new feature we want to ensure runs > b) has no obvious, explicit place to place it > and > c) is trivially solved by .ready() > > Then I start to think that practicality beats purity.

Re: Merging GSoC 2013 - Validation Refactor

s. Thanks again to Christopher Medrela for his excellent work in GSoC 2013, without whom none of this would have been possible. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 12:50 AM, Russell Keith-Magee < russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > After a long delay, I

Re: App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

For tracking purposes, I've opened a ticket: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/21829 Russ %-) On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 19 janv. 2014, at 13:46, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > > On Sun,

Re: App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Jannis Leidel wrote: > On 19.01.2014, at 08:56, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > First off - this isn't critical for 1.7 alpha - I'm raising it now > because I've been in this space for the last c

Re: App-loading: Pragmatic concerns about default AppConfig objects and ready() implementations

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Carl Meyer wrote: > On 01/21/2014 06:48 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > As Marc indicated in his post, I don't think we should be treating this > > as a permanent feature of the API, but as but as a migration aid. Yes, > > default_

Re: Must a Django Database Support Migrations?

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Michael Manfre wrote: > *Must a Django Database Support Migrations?* > > Django 1.7 adds schema migration support and this behavior is currently > required > to be able to effectively use Django and run the test suite. I opened > ticket > #21841 [1], which request

Re: Must a Django Database Support Migrations?

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Shai Berger wrote: > Hi, > > (quotations reordered a little) > > On Wednesday 22 January 2014 14:48:25 Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Michael Manfre > wrote: > > > *Why Disable Migrations?* >

Re: django.core.checks.register shouldn't be (primarily) a decorator

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Shai Berger wrote: > Hi, > > I took a look at PR 2192[1] earlier, and noted that checks.register keeps > being used as a function, called from AppConfig.ready(), and not as a > decorator; but it is defined as a decorator, so it looks a little funny: > > ch

Re: Recommending a Python 3-compatible MySQL connector

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Daniel Sears wrote: > I want to follow up on the issue of a Python 3 connector for MySQL. > > Oracle has developed an open source Python driver for > MySQL > : > > >- PEP 249-compliant >- pure Python

Re: 1.7 Schema migrations and AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE / get_profile() deprecation

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Brian Neal wrote: > Hello, > > The deprecation timeline says this about Django 1.7: > > "The AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE setting, and the get_profile() method on the > User model, will be removed." > > The dev 1.7 release notes say that the new schema migration is schedul

Re: 1.7 Schema migrations and AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE / get_profile() deprecation

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Ryan Hiebert wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < > russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Brian Neal wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>

Re: 1.7 Schema migrations and AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE / get_profile() deprecation

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Ryan Hiebert wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < > russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Ryan Hiebert wrote: >> >>> >>> >>

Re: 1.7 Schema migrations and AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE / get_profile() deprecation

On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Ryan Hiebert wrote: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:30 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < > russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Brian Neal wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>&g

Re: Minor concern with the "apps" convention

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > Hello, > > Django ≥ 1.7 recommends to define AppConfig subclasses for a given > application in apps.py. > > If the application also imports the app registry in its __init__.py with > `from django.apps

Re: get_user_model in Django 1.7

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > I wanted to write to the mailing list about this problem. Thanks for > bringing it up. > > Here's what happens. Django 1.7 is more strict about the import sequence. > Technically, the app registry pop

Re: Django doesn't log much at high verbosity levels

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd expect that Django would log something like: > > * At INFO level, at least one line per request (similar to runserver > output) > * At DEBUG level, enough information to recreate the request > > However, it doesn't appear to: >

Re: Check Framework Feedback

Hi Thomas, On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Thomas Güttler wrote: > Hi, > > here is some feedback to the check framework, documented at: > > https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/checks/ > > --- > > > {{{ > Error('error message', None) # Good > }}} > > I don't think this is "good". The "hint

Re: GSoC Project Ideas

On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Cody Scott wrote: > The Google Summer of Code 2014 Project Ideas seems to be outdated. > > https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/SummerOfCode2014 > > > Hi Cody, Yes - both these projects are still relevant. > Test framework cleanup - Is this still relevant with th

Re: Check Framework Feedback

Hi Curtis, The catch is that a hint isn't always possible - or the only reasonable hint would be redundant. For example: ERROR: max_length exceeds 100. HINT: Make max_length less than 100. The hint doesn't actually clarify anything above what the error message already tells you. You can see

Re: Multiple dates in single date field

On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Harjot Mann wrote: > Is it possible to add more than one date in a single date field in django? > How can a user do this if one wants to add? > This isn't really an appropriate question for django-developers. If you're looking for help using Django, you should be a

<    19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   >