Re: Simplifying MANIFEST.in

Pull request is https://github.com/django/django/pull/5039 if someone could double check it. Thanks for the feedback and check-manifest suggestion! On Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 9:44:10 PM UTC-4, Markus Holtermann wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 09:40:08AM -0700, Tim Graham wrote: >

Re: A modest proposal - more blocks in admin templates

There is at least one ticket about adding more blocks to the admin templates: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/14810 You can browse the "contrib.admin" component in Trac to find related issues: https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&component=contrib.admin&stage=Ac

Re: A modest proposal - more blocks in admin templates

Anderson wrote: > > The documentation could give better backwards compatibility guarantees. > > On Friday, July 24, 2015, Tim Graham > > wrote: > >> There is at least one ticket about adding more blocks to the admin >> templates: https://code.djangoproject.com/tick

Re: A modest proposal - more blocks in admin templates

better to tackle a subset of the admin templates first or > is it better to try and swallow this whole? > 3. Would a core committer need to adopt this to make sure it doesn't > languish? > > On Friday, 24 July 2015 14:51:44 UTC+1, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> As in

Should we use __slots__? (and benchmarking memory usage)

I'm interested in this old ticket about adding __slots__ to some of Django's classes to reduce memory usage: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12826 I wonder if anyone has some experience with __slots__ and could speak to whether this seems like a

Re: Feature proposal: Allow shadowing of abstract fields

Loic indicated the latest approach isn't ideal and said he might work on the issue. https://github.com/django/django/pull/4184 On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 6:59:56 PM UTC-4, Aron Podrigal wrote: > > Bumping up on this again, what are the plans for moving this ahead. -- You received this messag

Re: Feature proposal: Allow shadowing of abstract fields

ion > here [1] just without the locking functionality. > Is all the work related to virtual fields done yet? > > [1] > https://github.com/knbk/django/commit/7ac5b58587ea2a153766d1601965734731609cdf > On Jul 24, 2015 7:44 PM, "Tim Graham" > > wrote: > >&

Re: Should migrations have their imports sorted?

I think it's been addressed in 1.9 to at least some extent. See https://github.com/django/django/commit/7f20041bca43ca33f0a9617793f2af7ab07c3fab On Saturday, July 25, 2015 at 6:54:40 PM UTC-4, Raphael Michel wrote: > > Hello, > > some time ago, Django started to use isort to make sure imports ar

Fellow Report - July 25, 2015

Report for week ending July 25, 2015: Triaged --- https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25146 - Allow method_decorator to work at the class level (accepted) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25151 - rename LOGIN_REDIRECT_URL to POST_LOGIN_URL (won’t fix) https://code.djangoproject.

@staff_member_required handling of non-staff users

We received a ticket [1] noting that when a non-staff user tries to access an admin page, they will be redirected to the admin login page with no explanation. A pull request [2] proposes to add this message to login page if a user is authenticated, "While you are authenticated as {{ username }},

A new setting for custom gettext domains?

Since adding new settings is sometimes controversial, I wanted to ask for thoughts about this ticket [1] / pull request [2] which proposes a new LOCALE_FILENAMES setting to allow using additional gettext domains besides "django". I don't use translations myself, so thoughts about whether the us

Re: Django Admin New Look

In https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597 we discussed switching to SVG (instead of an icon font) in Django 1.10 when we can drop support for IE8. Now that Django 1.9 is slated for December and IE8 support ends the next month, I think it might be acceptable to drop IE8 support in 1.9 and g

Re: Making max_length argument optional

Ticket is https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/14094 On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:41:01 AM UTC-4, Loïc Bistuer wrote: > > Hi Aron, > > I'm +1 on addressing this, I often don't care about max_length, but I > still want a terse form representation. In my projects I use a subclass of > TextFi

future of QuerySet.extra()?

In light of the new expressions API, the idea of deprecating QuerySet.extra() has been informally discussed in IRC and elsewhere. I wonder if there is consensus to mark extra() as "unmaintained" and to suggest filing feature requests for functionality that can be performed through extra() but n

Re: future of QuerySet.extra()?

away with it eventually. That >> said I think there are still enough things that can't be done without it at >> present. A lot fewer now we have expressions, but still some. >> >> I'd be happy to put a moratorium on improving it, but we can't deprecate &g

Re: Formset clean() method is not called when invoking Formset is_valid()

I couldn't reproduce a problem. In your template, be sure to include {{ formset.non_form_errors }} to see that error. For future reference, "Is this a bug?" questions should typically be directed to django-users, thanks! On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 4:58:18 PM UTC-4, A D wrote: > > Hi, > >

Fellow Report - August 1, 2015

I think we’ll try for a 1.8 bug fix release on Friday or so since it’s been about a month since the last one. We also have a 1.4 release to fix compatibility with pip 7+ by disabling wheel support (Older versions of 1.4 would silently build a broken wheel when installed with those versions of p

Re: future of QuerySet.extra()?

lex foreign relationships? I keep using it when I need fields that >> are the result of weird aggregations over multiple JOINs with some unusual >> stuff like CASE fields and subqueries. >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Tim Graham wrote: >> >>> In li

Re: Field.get_flatchoices seems to never get used

Fixed in https://github.com/django/django/pull/5093, thanks for the report. On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 12:48:13 PM UTC-4, Collin Anderson wrote: > > That looks right to me. > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Andy Baker > wrote: > >> I'll file a ticket but I wanted a quick sanity check first.

Re: future of QuerySet.extra()?

Thanks! Here's a polished version of that: https://github.com/django/django/pull/5095 Let me know if it makes sense. On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 9:10:00 AM UTC-4, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Tim Graham > wrote: > > Is there an example we co

Re: [multidb] emit_pre_migrate_signal / emit_post_migrate_signal in Django 1.8

There is a check a few lines above the snippet you linked for "allow_migrate_model('other', Permission)". Is that returning the correct result? I don't think you can create permissions in the 'other' db without content types since they are linked by a foreign key. p.s. "Is it a bug" questions s

Re: How to disable system check framework?

If you have a big need to use old APIs, feel free to implement them in your own package or even in a reusable app so that others can benefit too. There have been other efforts like https://github.com/arteria/django-compat to do so. We can't maintain them forever, lest Django become bloated and

Re: Unable save model in admin with HStoreField

There is no need to cross-post to the mailing list when you also created a ticket: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25233 "Is this a bug?" questions should go to the django-users mailing list. Thanks! On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 7:21:36 AM UTC-4, Doan Hong Phi wrote: > > f = Food.object

Re: Decoration of class based views

A few days ago, we added the ability to use @method_decorator at the class level: https://github.com/django/django/commit/3bdaaf6777804d33ee46cdb5a889b8cc544a91f1 Does it help? Is your proposal to add the reduce() syntax to the docs? On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 7:21:36 AM UTC-4, Fabrizio Me

Re: How to disable system check framework?

Perhaps your monkeypatches should be moved to `AppConfig.ready()` methods so they are applied before the system check framework is invoked? Model and admin validation were part of Django 1.4 too, by the way. How many problematic checks are you running into? Can you describe them a bit more? If

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

Discouraging the use of super() seems like a bad idea that could limit flexibility in the future. I think Django's documentation describes the behavior pretty well. Perhaps the Django Girls tutorial could be improved instead. I don't recall having trouble understanding how this worked when I le

Re: Help needed with Oracle GIS backend

As we approach 1.9 alpha in about a month and half, no one has stepped up to offer help fix the Oracle GIS backend. Should we use another platform like the djangoproject.com blog to make a final plea for help? On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 9:34:10 AM UTC-4, Jani Tiainen wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Mar

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

uld you mind > eyeball-linting my code and telling me what you think, independently of > whether the PR gets accepted or not? > > Thanks again, > > Javier Candeira > > ** Note: I haven't looked whether something like this is easy to do, but > if it isn't,

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

't seem feasible for the commit keyword to be deprecated, so now we would two ways of doing something. On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 6:51:23 PM UTC-4, Javier Candeira wrote: > > On Friday, 7 August 2015 08:38:33 UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> I took a look at the co

Re: Keeping apps without migrations?

With the alpha for 1.9 coming up in 6 weeks, we need to decide whether or not to continue support for apps without migrations (currently in master no tables are created for such apps (as the deprecation timeline says), but it might be appropriate to add a warning or error message for this case i

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

mmended idiom is: > > class ThingForm(ModelForm): > def save(self): > self.instance.author = request.user > super(ThingForm, self).save() > > Cheers, > > Javier > > >> >> On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 6:51:23 PM UTC-4, J

Re: Ticket #25236: Remove ifequal from the template language

Django 1.9 has the option to add templates tags to the builtins using the TEMPLATES setting, so it wouldn't be difficult to publish a third-party app with the legacy tags and document how to use it in legacy projects that have difficulty updating: OPTIONS={ 'builtins': ['ifequal.tags'], }

Re: Django's model_to_dict(...) should return ALL fields, including hidden

As mentioned on the ticket, I think this discussion should first be about whether or not this function should be a public API. Could you please describe your use case? On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 8:01:41 AM UTC-4, Anton Danilchenko wrote: > > Hello Django users and developers! > > I found that

Re: How to disable system check framework?

admin.E108', 'admin.E304', 'fields.E305', 'admin.E116', 'fields.E306', 'fields.W342', 'fields'W340'] On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 4:35:37 AM UTC-4, Marcin Nowak wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 5:36:09 PM U

Re: CSRF_FAILURE_VIEW should not be used when DEBUG is False

It doesn't seem to be a bug to me as there's nothing in the documentation that says the view should only be used when DEBUG=True. The default template also includes logic to vary the content based on DEBUG. On Saturday, August 1, 2015 at 11:28:57 AM UTC-4, Žan Anderle wrote: > > Hey everyone! >

Re: CSRF_FAILURE_VIEW should not be used when DEBUG is False

ailure template is not very user friendly. > > Dne petek, 07. avgust 2015 14.41.21 UTC+2 je oseba Tim Graham napisala: >> >> It doesn't seem to be a bug to me as there's nothing in the documentation >> that says the view should only be used when DEBUG=True. The

Re: Ticket #25236: Remove ifequal from the template language

f" tag, I'm not sure delaying this a few more years would make a huge difference (that is to say, how about we make a "remove now or never" decision). We did a similar "undocument but don't remove" thing with the @permalink decorator. On Friday, August 7, 201

Re: Allow custom "BoundFields" on forms and make BoundField public API

Here is a ticket for making BoundField a public API: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12856 Writing that documentation seems like a good place to start. I would suggest not to move around so much code in your branch as that makes it difficult to tell what (if anything) has changed. On Satu

Re: Deprecating old keyword syntax in DTL

We could accept a patch to remove usage of the legacy syntax in Django templates right away (I just merged the same for ifequal/ifnotequal). Does removing this improve performance for the affected tags or is the main benefit simpler code? I don't see a need for an accelerated deprecation. On Sa

Fellow Report - August 8, 2015

Report for week ending August 8, 2015: Triaged --- https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/17914 - reverse() does not support namespaced view references when passed a callable (won’t fix) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25217 - cleanup - M2M shouldn't take a 'default' kwarg (duplica

Re: FAQ on Model-View-Controller

Dan, please offer a pull request if you are able. On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 12:03:06 PM UTC-4, Dan S wrote: > > Hello Aymeric, > > I apologize for using an aggressive tone, it is not my intent to insult > anyone, just to request that content be updated. xkcd/386 on the other > hand makes

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

"I like `.apply()`, since it can either suggest that it's applying the form's data to the instance, or applies the validation rules to the form data." I don't think it does either of those things though? I don't find the name intuitive for what it does. I think the purpose of "save(commit=Fals

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

en writing a patch: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/internals/contributing/writing-code/submitting-patches/#deprecating-a-feature On Monday, August 10, 2015 at 8:30:51 AM UTC-4, Javier Candeira wrote: > > On Monday, 10 August 2015 21:36:27 UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> &quo

Re: #25227 Add utility method `get_updated_model()` to `ModelForm`

Yes, I agree that a documentation change should be sufficient (although I still didn't look at the formsets situation). On Monday, August 10, 2015 at 11:57:19 AM UTC-4, Carl Meyer wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > On 08/10/2015 11:07 AM, Tim Graham wrote: > > Yes, the idea is that

removing FlatPage.enable_comments field?

Aymeric raised a ticket [1] noting that the FlatPage.enable_comments field appears in the admin by default, but isn't used anywhere which could be a bit confusing. It seems that django-contrib-comments has a moderation feature where you can specify a field on your model to control how comments

Re: Allow custom "BoundFields" on forms and make BoundField public API

et and work out some documentation. > > Am 08.08.2015 um 13:42 schrieb Tim Graham: > > Here is a ticket for making BoundField a public API: > > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12856 > > Writing that documentation seems like a good place to start. > > > > I woul

draft blog post for Oracle help

I've drafted a blog post to advertise our need for Oracle expertise. Please take a look and give feedback before it's published. Thanks! Django team seeks help maintaining Oracle and Oracle GIS backends --- Sever

Re: Keeping apps without migrations?

todetector to have a "create only" > mode > >that's more efficient or just write a new generator that is quick because > >it knows it's only making nonmigrated apps' migrations. > > > >Andrew > > > >On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:56

Re: Allow custom "BoundFields" on forms and make BoundField public API

I guess you know it's possible to access the regular form field with BoundField.field, e.g. {{ field.field.city }} in {{ field.field.country }}. Are there other advantageous to pushing those lookups to the BoundField as opposed to the form Field besides the shorter access in the template? Maybe

Re: set `object = None` on `SingleObjectMixin`

Yes, the proposal isn't new. Here is some related discussion: * https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/21801 * https://github.com/django/django/pull/2260 * https://github.com/django/django/pull/4595 * https://github.com/django/django/pull/4526 On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 3:38:58 PM UTC-4, steve b

Re: Testing Signals

Hi Grant, for future reference django-developers isn't meant as a second level support channel if you don't get a reply on -users. Thanks! On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 5:58:52 PM UTC-4, jdunck wrote: > > I suspect you have 2 different definitions of the signal under different > import paths. E

Fellow Report - August 15, 2015

Report for week ending August 15, 2015: Triaged --- https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25257 - Changing CharField to GenericIPAddressField with PostgreSQL should use "using field::inet" (duplicate) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25252 - Add a friendly error message when using

Re: Django Admin New Look

The SVG option looks good to me as well. While you are there, could you update the "no" icon as done in https://github.com/elky/django-flat-theme/pull/14? Unless someone can present an argument for keeping IE8 support, I wouldn't worry about it considering it will be end of life about 1 month a

Re: The hypothetical models.MultiField: is there a rationale to avoid it ? Or could it make it into future releases ?

I think the general idea is captured in ticket #5929 -- Allow Fields to use multiple db columns (complex datatypes). Is that the gist of your proposal? https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5929 On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 5:11:01 AM UTC-4, boito...@gmail.com wrote: > > Hi, > > While impleme

Re: Django Admin New Look

esday, August 18, 2015 at 3:32:18 AM UTC-4, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > > On 18 août 2015, at 01:28, Tim Graham > > wrote: > > > Unless someone can present an argument for keeping IE8 support, I > wouldn't worry about it considering it will be end of life about 1 month

[ANNOUNCE] Django security releases issued (1.4.22, 1.7.10, and 1.8.4)

Today the Django team issued multiple releases -- Django 1.4.22, 1.7.10, and 1.8.4 -- as part of our security process. These releases address a security issue, and we encourage all users to upgrade as soon as possible. More details can be found on our blog: https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/

request for API review of streaming responses additions

I'd like to ask for a high-level API review of some proposed streaming API additions (I have already given the patch a couple of detailed reviews, but other eyes would be welcome on the details as well). Summary: * django.views.generic.base.StreamingTemplateView to stream a template rather tha

Re: OperationalError at / in django

Hi, if you're looking for help on how to use Django, you should post to the django-users mailing list. This list is for discussing the development of Django itself. Thanks! On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 7:23:56 AM UTC-4, Remaze Vs wrote: > > I am new in django..error like no such column: pro

Re: How to contribute

Hi Sarthak, You might like to read the archives of the django-core-mentorship mailing list as similar inquiries have been made there. https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/django-core-mentorship Feel free to ping me (timograham) in #django-dev on IRC if you want to chat. Tim On W

Re: Django Admin New Look

To see what's required, I made a pull request for jQuery 2 here: https://github.com/django/django/pull/5155 The selenium and JavaScript tests pass without any modifications to the admin's JavaScript. My own opinion is that if you really need IE8 support, it's not difficult to write a custom t

Re: create_permisions(): Call to ContentType.objects.clear_cache() missing

Hi Thomas, As indicated by the flags on the ticket, it "Needs tests" in order to be committed. On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 5:31:46 AM UTC-4, guettli wrote: > > There is a six years old issue which has a working patch: > > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10827 > > If a migration deletes

Re: create_permisions(): Call to ContentType.objects.clear_cache() missing

> 5. implicit: New permissions created for an existing ContentTypes should > be created. Up to now an exception happens. (See ticket). > > How can I write a unittest which does the above steps? > > Regards, > Thomas > > Am Donnerstag, 20. August 2015 13:14:21 UTC+2

Re: Django Admin New Look

Thanks everyone for feedback. I think it's a good idea to send this to the technical board to reach a consensus. Here is the summary as I see it: Benefits of jQuery 2: * Smaller file size (36KB or 11KB for minified version) * "Faster" -- not sure this has any practical benefit currently, but migh

revisiting the "easy pickings" flag in Trac

In my experience the "easy pickings" flag is ill-defined and insufficient for describing the difficulty of a ticket. I don't want to get stuck in categorizing tickets just for the sake of it, but I think a drop down with options like the following could be useful in helping contributors find su

Re: Adding Optional Better Unicode Handling for `slugify`

Does https://github.com/django/django/commit/f8cc464452f495fce2a3d6f7494396c8f798a1e6#diff-f614fc7a7dbb2882be1692a448abd21fR413 work for you? :-) On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 10:29:03 AM UTC-4, Carlton wrote: > > Hi. > > This came up on Crispy Forms >

Re: Allow custom "BoundFields" on forms and make BoundField public API

While reviewing the proposed documentation for BoundField, I noticed the methods BoundField.as_textarea() and as_text() [1] introduced at the start of new forms [2]. According to the comment, their purpose is as "shortcuts for changing the output widget type". These methods aren't documented, an

Re: Improving MSSQL and Azure SQL support on Django

I agree it would be great to get some help running the Django tests on Windows. I run them in a local virtual machine every so often, but I would love to be able to delegate fixing Windows issues. Meet, can your team provide ongoing help with fixing Windows-specific issues in Django, even if th

Fellow Report - August 22, 2015

Report for week ending August 22, 2015: Besides the security release on Tuesday, I also spent a while debugging some selenium test failures with a new version of chromedriver. It turned out to be a combination of bugs in chromedriver as well as some issues in our tests. The build should be ba

Re: URL dispatcher API

>>> matching) will still work regardless! >>> >> >> I'll probably implement something like this before it is merged. I've >> been struggling to implement the `URL` class in a way that provided such >> methods in a way that fully conformed RFC

Re: URL dispatcher API

? > > It would be a shame for something so powerful to fall by the wayside. I'm > sure I'm not the only one to see such value in this addition. > > On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 10:36:53 AM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> I don't think so. Marten has been MI

Re: Improving MSSQL and Azure SQL support on Django

I guess the first step is to identify which third-party backend(s) we'll target to adopt officially (or at least borrow from heavily). For example, will we need separate backends for MSSQL and Azure? (Knowing nothing about the landscape myself, this question could be nonsensical.) Is this discu

status of 1.9 release blockers

Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release! Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21). Release blockers: - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688 Owner: Jani Tiainen Status: In progress (test suite run

Okay to use form field labels in admin history?

Do you like the idea to use form field labels in the admin history messages instead of the form field names themselves? It's been implemented here: https://github.com/django/django/pull/5169 One consideration is that the messages are generated/stored in the current language so this could increa

Re: How to disable system check framework?

It seems this was an intentional design decision as the documentation states, "Silenced warnings will no longer be output to the console; silenced errors will still be printed, but will not prevent management commands from running." I guess it could/should be revisited? https://docs.djangoproje

Re: URL Dispatcher

Thanks for taking this on, James. I do think it would be best to defer this to Django 1.10 rather than try to rush it into Django 1.9 at this point. Also, there are several URL related deprecations scheduled to complete in 1.10 which should simplify things (I've started on those removals here:

Re: Okay to use form field labels in admin history?

The current approach has worked "well enough" for 10 years. I think we can wait a little longer for a better solution rather than change the message format twice. Want to give it a try? On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 11:07:45 AM UTC-4, Ramez Ashraf wrote: > > Dear devs > I'm the PR mentioned co

Re: How to disable system check framework?

I created a ticket and pull request for the silencing of error/critical messages: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25318#ticket https://github.com/django/django/pull/5197 On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 11:03:18 AM UTC-4, Carl Meyer wrote: > > On 08/25/2015 08:57 AM, Marcin Nowak wrote: > >

Adding more __repr__() methods

I'd like to ask for other opinions on this pull request which adds more __repr__() methods: https://github.com/django/django/pull/5059 Some concerns: * Adding things that aren't part of the class (e.g. settings) seems questionable to me. * There is a chance to leak sensitive data in __repr__ a

Re: Keeping apps without migrations?

August 13, 2015 at 1:56:05 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote: > > It's a one line change in the code to keep the status quo from 1.8. The > main drawback I see is continued support tickets about dependencies between > apps with and without migrations. I already removed the documentation &

Re: Django Admin New Look

Carl pinged me in #django-dev to say that the technical board says it's ok to go ahead with dropping IE8 support in admin for 1.9. Three +1s and two +0s. The +0s were due to feeling that: a) IE isn't as dead as in some places as it is in the Valley b) the advantages gained by dropping support are

Re: How I can write webservice use aldjemy with django?

Hi, This is off-topic for the django-developers mailing-list, which is dedicated to the development of Django itself. Please send usage questions to django-users. On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 6:02:52 AM UTC-4, Văn Nhất Trần wrote: > > Hi everyone! > > I have learned python language and django f

Re: CHECK Constraints and migrations

Not sure that it has any useful info at this point, but there is an old ticket about adding support for CHECK constraints here: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/11964 On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 2:29:13 AM UTC-4, Gavin Wahl wrote: > > > making lookups and transforms work on Python > side,

Re: Adding more __repr__() methods

> observed. Did I miss something? > > Cheers > > On Friday, 28 August 2015 01:16:02 UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> I'd like to ask for other opinions on this pull request which adds more >> __repr__() methods: https://github.com/django/django/pull/5059 >> >

Re: Adding more __repr__() methods

But I think the general idea of > more/improved repr methods is a good one. > > On Friday, 28 August 2015 23:02:25 UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> The repr for MessageMiddleware includes settings.MESSAGE_STORAGE. >> >> On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 8:59:37 PM UT

Re: Ticket 2273: django.contrib.auth.models.User: username is case-sensitive

I can't think of a reason not to make the suggested change. It seems like an odd requirement if a site *requires* allowing new usernames to be case-sensitive. On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 12:27:39 PM UTC-4, Daniel Stanton wrote: > > Following the end of https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2

Re: Django Admin New Look

is interested) be able to > look into it. > > /Nick. > > On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 1:44:23 PM UTC, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> In some previous discussion, it was suggested to have a toggle between >> the new and old designs to ease the transition. I guess this co

Add DoNotTrack (DNT) middleware?

from the ticket: DoNotTrack (DNT) is a HTTP request header, a proposed W3C standard ​http://www.w3.org/TR/tracking-dnt/#dnt-header-field which is used by the browsers to communicate user's preference on server-side profiling or tacking. There is a number of 3rd party Django middlewares that add

soft deadline to guarantee a patch review for 1.9

I have been able to knock down the "Patches needing review" queue [1] to about 10 tickets (excluding my own) and would like to make an offer: If anyone submits a patch that makes a good effort to meet the patch review checklist requirements [2] by Friday, September 4, I will do my best to give

Re: Ticket 2273: django.contrib.auth.models.User: username is case-sensitive

The suggested change is to not allow a new user if there's a username__iexact match. On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 2:56:14 PM UTC-4, James Bennett wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Florian Apolloner > wrote: > >> Which is? Following the ticket I do not see any clear consenus at all.

Fellow Report - August 29, 2015

Report for week ending August 29, 2015: Triaged --- https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25296 - Failed Manager.create() could pollute related models cache (accepted) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25305 - BIGINT auto field and related (duplicate) https://code.djangoproject.com

Re: WIKI_VIEW privileges are required to perform this operation. You don't have the required permissions.

Hi, as far as I know, we haven't banned anyone in Trac. We did receive a similar report in IRC last week (maybe it was you). Could you create a ticket in the code.djangoproject.com issue tracker with any more details? https://github.com/django/code.djangoproject.com/issues On Monday, August 31,

Re: Keeping apps without migrations?

ut >> >> that is a limitation we had since 1.7 (silent failure; 1.8 fails >> loud). >> >> >> >> While migrations should provide *the* way to maintain your database I >> see >> >> the points that have been made in other

Re: Keeping apps without migrations?

As far as how well apps without migrations would work compared to 1.8, a couple things come to mind: 1. There's no management commands to get the SQL for these apps. 2. There's no more support for initial data/custom SQL. On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 10:48:25 AM UTC-4, Tim Graham wro

Re: Erroneous HTTPS CSRF Referrer Failure

Is this related or duplicate to https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24496? That ticket has a patch that got stalled a bit, but might be worth reviving first in case this new one causes it to go stale. On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 1:37:45 PM UTC-4, Joshua Kehn wrote: > > On 31 Aug 2015, at 13:

Re: Ticket #25328 - LiveServerTestCase with HTTPS - opinions?

Could you explain what types of tests require https (or otherwise expand on the rationale for adding this)? If the answer is that we don't want to have a separate "test settings" with all the SSL settings disabled (CSRF_COOKIE_SECURE, SECURE_HSTS_SECONDS, etc.) then I understand this, however,

Re: Improving MSSQL and Azure SQL support on Django

/django-mssql/src> > > 2. Django-pymssql <https://github.com/aaugustin/django-pymssql> > > 3. Django-pyodbc-azure <https://github.com/michiya/django-pyodbc-azure> > > 4. Django-pyodbc <https://github.com/avidal/django-pyodbc> > > > Am I missing any? > >

Re: Making the test suite run faster

Aymeric, did you envision any changes to Django's CI setup? Currently we run 1 Jenkins executor per CPU, so I don't know that adding parallelization would have any benefit? (We are already using all 8 CPUs when we're running 8 concurrent builds from the matrix.) If not, then I wonder how we can

Re: Ticket #23242 -- Approximate date_hierarchy

This seems okay at first glance, though I wonder if an enum-like object might be better than magic int/boolean values. Something like: class ApproximateWith(object): NONE = 0 YEARS = 1 MONTHS = 2 DAYS = 3 Do you think a separate ModelAdmin attribute better than allowing something

Re: Improving MSSQL and Azure SQL support on Django

ning stages and would love to get feedback. > What do you think about the goals mentioned above? Is there anything you > like to add/remove? > > > We can definitely make attending via Skype an option for attendees unable > to make it in person. > > > Best, > > Mee

Re: Adding more __repr__() methods

a > repr should be an unambiguous representation of the object that is useful > in debugging. Certainly the "eval" rule is sufficient for the > "unambiguous" rule, but it isn't necessary. I would rather have something > readable than something evalable. >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >