in html.tags the form function has 'POST' for the default method,
which is invalid xhtml. I changed it to:
def form(url, method=post,...
and all is well.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Depending on the locking behaviour of the bulk loader it could
make sense to load the data into simple preprocessing tables
which don't have any validation logic or primary key constraints.
From these tables the final processing is then done. This would
move the error handling from the bulk
On Jun 12, 5:13 am, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although again, we have two issues. One is HTML-to-text (essentially
lynx-as-a-function). The other is truncating an HTML string while
keeping it well-formed (which means not stopping in the middle of a
tag and closing any open tags).
On Jun 12, 5:13 am, Mike Orr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although again, we have two issues. One is HTML-to-text (essentially
lynx-as-a-function). The other is truncating an HTML string while
keeping it well-formed (which means not stopping in the middle of a
tag and closing any open tags).
One other option might be to have each request dump its data to a
random file with a .tmp extension to a queue directory. When the
process is done, it can rename the file (which should be atomic) to
a .csv file. Then the controller exits.
You then have a second worker process checking the
if you use my method above I would do something like this: rename file
to .err and send an email to an admin with as much detail as possible
while possibly saving said error information in a separate file in
case the email doesn't come through. The main concern here would be
whether or not the
Hello all,
I am new to the Python web-programming world and trying to decide on
frameworks. I was really impressed with Django, but ran into some
problems with IIS hosting. Since Pylons had really nice install
instructions for IIS, I started to take a look and I like the
philosophy. The WSGI
Thank you all for your comments. Its clear though, for me, that
Pylons will not work for my projects. The need to develop components
that fit easily and natively into the larger application is a must.
Its disappointing though, b/c I was really liking the philosophy
behind Pylons. Keep up the
On May 24, 9:13 pm, Philip Jenvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If these are in fact separate applications, you can make each one its
own Pylons app. Then you might also have a common package of code
shared between all three (this would be a separate egg).
Then at deployment time you can combine
