date:20231023

Re: [Django] #34920: FileExtensionValidator.eq() should ignore allowed_extensions order.

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34920: FileExtensionValidator.__eq__() should ignore allowed_extensions order.
-+-
 Reporter:  ksg  |Owner:  ksg
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Core (Other) |  Version:  dev
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak ):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 In [changeset:"d22ba0763086f71fb6df8502162ea63944d166b1" d22ba076]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="d22ba0763086f71fb6df8502162ea63944d166b1"
 Fixed #34920 -- Made FileExtensionValidator.__eq__() ignore
 allowed_extensions ordering.
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5fdc889c-c91531f9-2d47-4799-81ea-c328c36f70dd-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #10961: Allow users to override forward and reverse relationships on proxy models with !ForeignKey fields.

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#10961: Allow users to override forward and reverse relationships on proxy 
models
with !ForeignKey fields.
-+-
 Reporter:  Tai Lee  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  new
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  proxy ForeignKey | Triage Stage:  Accepted
  reverse relationship manager   |
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by powderflask):

 For others who land here looking for solutions...
 IF there is a field on your model that can be used to determine which
 Proxy subclass to initialize, this approach works beautifully:
 https://schinckel.net/2013/06/13/django-proxy-model-state-machine/

 No fuss, no overhead, every concrete object gets its correct proxy
 subclass type.  Limited use-case, but a nifty solution if you happen to
 have it.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5fd185a7-6d1e13a8-171d-4eb7-8656-42c0fa13a012-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34920: FileExtensionValidator.eq() should ignore allowed_extensions order.

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34920: FileExtensionValidator.__eq__() should ignore allowed_extensions order.
-+-
 Reporter:  ksg  |Owner:  ksg
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Core (Other) |  Version:  dev
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 * stage:  Accepted => Ready for checkin


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5fbda0a0-55ed5ad4-c547-4c0c-a53d-b3f171fef050-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1
-+-
 Reporter:  James Gillard|Owner:  Mariusz
 |  Felisiak
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  contrib.messages |  Version:  5.0
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 * owner:  nobody => Mariusz Felisiak
 * status:  new => assigned


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e433e05-99cbdf2a-341a-4059-be22-e72ddb0b6a90-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1
--+
 Reporter:  James Gillard |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug   |   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.messages  |  Version:  5.0
 Severity:  Release blocker   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:| Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0 |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0 |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0 |UI/UX:  0
--+

Comment (by James Gillard):

 Hi Mariusz, that does indeed fix it for me!

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e09ba42-c648f475-8721-4168-bdce-ae627809cf2a-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations  |  Version:  4.2
 Severity:  Normal  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0   |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0   |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0   |UI/UX:  0
+--
Description changed by Sebastian Jekutsch:

Old description:

> Hi there,
>
> sorry for the unspecific summary, but I expect to have a few issues here
> without knowing how to tell on from the other.
>
> I expect squashmigrations with optimization turned on (default) to result
> in a squashed migration file so that running makemigration afterwards
> doesn't detect any migration needs. In my case though, some single
> migrations doesn't seem to to be in the squashed migration file.
>
> Squashing is important to me, because for some time I temporarily
> experimented with third-party libraries I don't want to include anymore.
> But installing/migrating in a new database still require them to be in
> the virtual environment, of cource, if not squashed mit optimization on.
>
> See attachments:
> * Zip of single migrations 0001 to 0116
> * Resulting squashed migration file of "manage.py squashmigrations
> knowledgebase 0116"
> * Resulting migration file of "manage.py makemigrations" -> 0117
>
> Additionally, I found that two models seem to have disappeared completely
> in the squashed migration file as well as it has not been recognized by
> the makemigrations cross-check:
> * AbstractEntity - this may be ok since it's an abstract super-class, but
> note that AbtractCategory *is* included in the squashing
> * Activity - this model vanished
>
> See attachment models.py

New description:

 Hi there,

 sorry for the unspecific summary, but I expect to have a few issues here
 without knowing how to tell one from the other.

 I expect squashmigrations with optimization turned on (default) to result
 in a squashed migration file so that running makemigration afterwards
 doesn't detect any migration needs. In my case though, makemigration
 detected for differences, i.e. some single migrations doesn't seem to be
 in the squashed migration file.

 Squashing is important to me, because for some time I temporarily
 experimented with third-party libraries I don't want to include anymore.
 But installing/migrating in a new database still require them to be in the
 virtual environment, of course, if not squashed with optimization on.

 See attachments:
 * Zip of single migrations 0001 to 0116
 * Resulting squashed migration file of "manage.py squashmigrations
 knowledgebase 0116"
 * Resulting migration file of "manage.py makemigrations" -> 0117

 Additionally, I found that two models seem to have errorneously
 disappeared completely in the squashed migration file as well as they have
 not been recognized by the makemigrations cross-check (which I expected to
 be empty anyway):
 * Activity
 * AbstractEntity - this may be ok since it's an abstract super-class, but
 note that AbstractCategory *is* included in the squashing

 See attachment models.py

 In case any information is missing please don't hesitate to contact me.

--

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e05f726-cd7c38f3-7136-4507-93a0-2eb58360f0fe-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations  |  Version:  4.2
 Severity:  Normal  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0   |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0   |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0   |UI/UX:  0
+--
Description changed by Sebastian Jekutsch:

Old description:

> Hi there,
>
> sorry for the unspecific summary, but I expect to have a few issues here
> without knowing how to tell on from the other.
>
> I expect squashmigrations with optimization turned on (default) to result
> in a squashed migration file so that running makemigration afterwards
> doesn't detect any migration needs. In my case though, some single
> migrations doesn't seem to to be in the squashed migration file.
>
> Squashing is important to me, because for some time I temporarily
> experimented with third-party libraries I don't want to include anymore.
> But installing/migrating in a new database still require them to be in
> the virtual environment, of cource, if not squashed mit optimization on.
>
> See attachments:
> * Zip of single migrations 0001 to 0116
> * Resulting squashed migration file of "manage.py squashmigrations
> knowledgebase 0116"
> * Resulting migration file of "manage.py makemigrations"
>
> Additionally, I found that two models seem to have disappeared completely
> in the squashed migration file as well as it has not been recognized by
> the makemigrations cross-check:
> * AbstractEntity - this may be ok since it's an abstract super-class, but
> note that AbtractCategory *is* included in the squashing
> * Activity - this model vanished
>
> See attachment models.py

New description:

 Hi there,

 sorry for the unspecific summary, but I expect to have a few issues here
 without knowing how to tell on from the other.

 I expect squashmigrations with optimization turned on (default) to result
 in a squashed migration file so that running makemigration afterwards
 doesn't detect any migration needs. In my case though, some single
 migrations doesn't seem to to be in the squashed migration file.

 Squashing is important to me, because for some time I temporarily
 experimented with third-party libraries I don't want to include anymore.
 But installing/migrating in a new database still require them to be in the
 virtual environment, of cource, if not squashed mit optimization on.

 See attachments:
 * Zip of single migrations 0001 to 0116
 * Resulting squashed migration file of "manage.py squashmigrations
 knowledgebase 0116"
 * Resulting migration file of "manage.py makemigrations" -> 0117

 Additionally, I found that two models seem to have disappeared completely
 in the squashed migration file as well as it has not been recognized by
 the makemigrations cross-check:
 * AbstractEntity - this may be ok since it's an abstract super-class, but
 note that AbtractCategory *is* included in the squashing
 * Activity - this model vanished

 See attachment models.py

--

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e016970-6bf5a105-eba8-4a81-9363-e5c94f48cf83-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations  |  Version:  4.2
 Severity:  Normal  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0   |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0   |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0   |UI/UX:  0
+--
Changes (by Sebastian Jekutsch):

 * Attachment "models.py" added.


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e00c1ab-8c09075e-7513-4b98-9e81-3929f7e5f96d-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations  |  Version:  4.2
 Severity:  Normal  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0   |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0   |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0   |UI/UX:  0
+--
Changes (by Sebastian Jekutsch):

 * Attachment
 "0117_alter_actor_category_alter_document_abstract_and_more.py" added.


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e006fa6-0eea6647-d777-4c54-b68a-5232340c3021-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations  |  Version:  4.2
 Severity:  Normal  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0   |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0   |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0   |UI/UX:  0
+--
Changes (by Sebastian Jekutsch):

 * Attachment
 "0001_squashed_0116_impact_alternative_names_alter_document_assocs_and_more.py"
 added.


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5e001562-e01a4a5d-44f0-4ce8-809e-2a209b6553c7-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
+--
 Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug |   Status:  new
Component:  Migrations  |  Version:  4.2
 Severity:  Normal  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0   |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0   |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0   |UI/UX:  0
+--
Changes (by Sebastian Jekutsch):

 * Attachment "single_migrations.zip" added.


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dffbaea-73befbd1-0b52-48df-9a11-e718931039ad-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

[Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly
--+
   Reporter:  Sebastian Jekutsch  |  Owner:  nobody
   Type:  Bug | Status:  new
  Component:  Migrations  |Version:  4.2
   Severity:  Normal  |   Keywords:
   Triage Stage:  Unreviewed  |  Has patch:  0
Needs documentation:  0   |Needs tests:  0
Patch needs improvement:  0   |  Easy pickings:  0
  UI/UX:  0   |
--+
 Hi there,

 sorry for the unspecific summary, but I expect to have a few issues here
 without knowing how to tell on from the other.

 I expect squashmigrations with optimization turned on (default) to result
 in a squashed migration file so that running makemigration afterwards
 doesn't detect any migration needs. In my case though, some single
 migrations doesn't seem to to be in the squashed migration file.

 Squashing is important to me, because for some time I temporarily
 experimented with third-party libraries I don't want to include anymore.
 But installing/migrating in a new database still require them to be in the
 virtual environment, of cource, if not squashed mit optimization on.

 See attachments:
 * Zip of single migrations 0001 to 0116
 * Resulting squashed migration file of "manage.py squashmigrations
 knowledgebase 0116"
 * Resulting migration file of "manage.py makemigrations"

 Additionally, I found that two models seem to have disappeared completely
 in the squashed migration file as well as it has not been recognized by
 the makemigrations cross-check:
 * AbstractEntity - this may be ok since it's an abstract super-class, but
 note that AbtractCategory *is* included in the squashing
 * Activity - this model vanished

 See attachment models.py

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dff7019-f0ca1a18-4233-414b-8025-7f059b460747-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1
--+
 Reporter:  James Gillard |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug   |   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.messages  |  Version:  5.0
 Severity:  Release blocker   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:| Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0 |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0 |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0 |UI/UX:  0
--+

Comment (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 James, Can you confirm that the following patch fixes this issue for you?
 {{{#!diff
 diff --git a/django/contrib/messages/storage/base.py
 b/django/contrib/messages/storage/base.py
 index 124049a5e2..5d89acfe69 100644
 --- a/django/contrib/messages/storage/base.py
 +++ b/django/contrib/messages/storage/base.py
 @@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
  from django.conf import settings
  from django.contrib.messages import constants, utils
 +from django.utils.functional import SimpleLazyObject

 -LEVEL_TAGS = utils.get_level_tags()
 +LEVEL_TAGS = SimpleLazyObject(utils.get_level_tags)


  class Message:

 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dcf1c33-1c349bed-89d2-445a-a570-506cdb8c8999-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1
--+
 Reporter:  James Gillard |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug   |   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.messages  |  Version:  5.0
 Severity:  Release blocker   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:| Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0 |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0 |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0 |UI/UX:  0
--+
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 * cc: François Freitag (added)
 * severity:  Normal => Release blocker
 * stage:  Unreviewed => Accepted


Comment:

 Thanks for the report! Regression in
 b7fe36ad37fb18c4bc7932c0aec6ae4f299b9622.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dc7d829-b171f9dc-6abd-4d31-b469-f096f2052795-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1
--+--
 Reporter:  James Gillard |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug   |   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.messages  |  Version:  5.0
 Severity:  Normal|   Resolution:
 Keywords:| Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0 |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0 |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0 |UI/UX:  0
--+--
Changes (by James Gillard):

 * component:  Uncategorized => contrib.messages


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dc0bae4-7dd1710c-859d-4f11-afc0-d70cfc139623-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam Johnson |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  5.0
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:  choices, callable,   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
  lazy   |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Natalia <124304+nessita@…>):

 In [changeset:"cc5901fa8edc25ce6d67d110c18ddf9f16965e32" cc5901f]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="cc5901fa8edc25ce6d67d110c18ddf9f16965e32"
 [5.0.x] Fixed #34899 -- Added blank choice to forms' callable choices
 lazily.

 Backport of 171f91d9ef5177850c2f12b26dd732785f6ac034 from main
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5daf5c0b-1db459f4-7399-45a4-8295-e98f6de107ed-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam Johnson |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  5.0
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:  choices, callable,   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
  lazy   |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Natalia <124304+nessita@…>):

 In [changeset:"bbe90f3c00eb29a8e86b1b638466029def7f444a" bbe90f3]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="bbe90f3c00eb29a8e86b1b638466029def7f444a"
 [5.0.x] Refs #34899 -- Extracted Field.flatchoices to flatten_choices
 helper function.

 Co-authored-by: Natalia Bidart <124304+ness...@users.noreply.github.com>

 Backport of 74afcee234f8be989623ccc7c28b9fb97fb548f0 from main
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dac6410-c43634cd-ccfc-472c-b147-d3336859f542-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #31262: Support dictionaries in Field.choices for named groups.

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#31262: Support dictionaries in Field.choices for named groups.
-+-
 Reporter:  Tom Forbes   |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Natalia <124304+nessita@…>):

 In [changeset:"711c0547224de00aee39b8720c706ac4977e89fd" 711c054]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="711c0547224de00aee39b8720c706ac4977e89fd"
 [5.0.x] Refs #31262 -- Added __eq__() and __getitem__() to
 BaseChoiceIterator.

 This makes it easier to work with lazy iterators used for callables,
 etc. when extracting items or comparing to lists, e.g. during testing.

 Also added `BaseChoiceIterator.__iter__()` to make it clear that
 subclasses must implement this and added `__all__` to the module.

 Co-authored-by: Adam Johnson 
 Co-authored-by: Natalia Bidart <124304+ness...@users.noreply.github.com>

 Backport of 07fa79ef2bb3e8cace7bd87b292c6c85230eed05 from main
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5dab383b-e2ce8f33-6867-44a3-abad-4c7d6490dbc5-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam Johnson |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  5.0
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:  choices, callable,   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
  lazy   |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Natalia <124304+nessita@…>):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 In [changeset:"171f91d9ef5177850c2f12b26dd732785f6ac034" 171f91d]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="171f91d9ef5177850c2f12b26dd732785f6ac034"
 Fixed #34899 -- Added blank choice to forms' callable choices lazily.
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5da3b039-2fa8d242-8afa-4bdd-891b-ae67841e63c4-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #31262: Support dictionaries in Field.choices for named groups.

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#31262: Support dictionaries in Field.choices for named groups.
-+-
 Reporter:  Tom Forbes   |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Natalia <124304+nessita@…>):

 In [changeset:"07fa79ef2bb3e8cace7bd87b292c6c85230eed05" 07fa79ef]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="07fa79ef2bb3e8cace7bd87b292c6c85230eed05"
 Refs #31262 -- Added __eq__() and __getitem__() to BaseChoiceIterator.

 This makes it easier to work with lazy iterators used for callables,
 etc. when extracting items or comparing to lists, e.g. during testing.

 Also added `BaseChoiceIterator.__iter__()` to make it clear that
 subclasses must implement this and added `__all__` to the module.

 Co-authored-by: Adam Johnson 
 Co-authored-by: Natalia Bidart <124304+ness...@users.noreply.github.com>
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5da3afc5-5f3f6c67-0056-4dab-99ec-82f34e4c81ae-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam Johnson |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  5.0
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  choices, callable,   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
  lazy   |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Natalia <124304+nessita@…>):

 In [changeset:"74afcee234f8be989623ccc7c28b9fb97fb548f0" 74afcee]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="74afcee234f8be989623ccc7c28b9fb97fb548f0"
 Refs #34899 -- Extracted Field.flatchoices to flatten_choices helper
 function.

 Co-authored-by: Natalia Bidart <124304+ness...@users.noreply.github.com>
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5da3afed-94318c78-d708-42a3-bf60-72f93341343b-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

[Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1
-+
   Reporter:  James Gillard  |  Owner:  nobody
   Type:  Bug| Status:  new
  Component:  Uncategorized  |Version:  5.0
   Severity:  Normal |   Keywords:
   Triage Stage:  Unreviewed |  Has patch:  0
Needs documentation:  0  |Needs tests:  0
Patch needs improvement:  0  |  Easy pickings:  0
  UI/UX:  0  |
-+
 I've been running 5.0a1 off and on with our project to spot issues and
 have come across my first.

 As stated in the title, MESSAGE_TAGS in settings.py is now having no
 effect for me. I noticed this when the extra classes we define inside
 settings.py disappeared from the rendered HTML of a message. I tried
 having a play around with the django test suite to recreate, but I didn't
 achieve that, so the proof I have is from adding a debug line inside
 `django.contrib.messages.utils.get_level_tags`. I stopped at this point,
 as someone might be able to point out something obvious I've missed that's
 leading to this.

 Here's the debug `print` I've added:

 {{{
 def get_level_tags():
 """
 Return the message level tags.
 """
 print(getattr(settings, "MESSAGE_TAGS", {}))
 return {
 **constants.DEFAULT_TAGS,
 **getattr(settings, "MESSAGE_TAGS", {}),
 }
 }}}

 Here is what we have inside settings.py:
 {{{
 MESSAGE_TAGS = {
 messages.DEBUG: 'debug alert-info is-info',
 messages.INFO: 'info alert-info is-info',
 messages.SUCCESS: 'success alert-success is-success',
 messages.WARNING: 'warning alert-warning is-warning',
 messages.ERROR: 'error alert-danger is-danger',
 }
 }}}

 And here's what I'm seeing when going from 4.2.5 to 5.0a1, and also
 testing latest main; lines removed for brevity:

 {{{
 ✗ pip install Django==4.2.5
 ✗ ./manage.py runserver
 {10: 'debug alert-info is-info', 20: 'info alert-info is-info', 25:
 'success alert-success is-success', 30: 'warning alert-warning is-
 warning', 40: 'error alert-danger is-danger'}
 {10: 'debug alert-info is-info', 20: 'info alert-info is-info', 25:
 'success alert-success is-success', 30: 'warning alert-warning is-
 warning', 40: 'error alert-danger is-danger'}
 Django version 4.2.5, using settings 'journee.settings'

 ✗ pip install Django==5.0a1
 ✗ ./manage.py runserver
 {}
 {}
 Django version 5.0a1, using settings 'journee.settings'

 ✗ pip install git+https://github.com/django/django.git
 ✗ ./manage.py runserver
 {}
 {}
 Django version 5.1.dev20231023125957, using settings 'journee.settings'
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5d972198-b482e4bc-173f-4ed9-839e-d46aafd33a16-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam Johnson |Owner:  Nick Pope
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  5.0
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  choices, callable,   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
  lazy   |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Natalia Bidart):

 * stage:  Accepted => Ready for checkin


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5d765113-9193dbad-8b94-4205-b7da-aff2c76bcbb0-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34920: FileExtensionValidator.eq() should ignore allowed_extensions order.

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34920: FileExtensionValidator.__eq__() should ignore allowed_extensions order.
--+
 Reporter:  ksg   |Owner:  ksg
 Type:  Bug   |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Core (Other)  |  Version:  dev
 Severity:  Normal|   Resolution:
 Keywords:| Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1 |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0 |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0 |UI/UX:  0
--+
Changes (by ksg):

 * needs_better_patch:  1 => 0


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5d3ddbe0-a460e51f-9078-4fc1-894b-ea34e544b6dc-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34118: Python 3.12 compatibility

2023-10-23 Thread Django

#34118: Python 3.12 compatibility
-+-
 Reporter:  Mariusz Felisiak |Owner:  Mariusz
 |  Felisiak
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Core (Other) |  Version:  dev
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Mariusz Felisiak ):

 In [changeset:"e2922b0d5f18169d1d0115a6db5d2ed8c42d0692" e2922b0]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="e2922b0d5f18169d1d0115a6db5d2ed8c42d0692"
 Refs #34118 -- Avoided repeat coroutine checks in MiddlewareMixin.
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018b5b8fe373-09a0d1a4-d3d6-4fdc-9ee3-28108648d28b-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34920: FileExtensionValidator.eq() should ignore allowed_extensions order.

Re: [Django] #10961: Allow users to override forward and reverse relationships on proxy models with !ForeignKey fields.

Re: [Django] #34920: FileExtensionValidator.eq() should ignore allowed_extensions order.

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

Re: [Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

[Django] #34924: Example for squashmigration not working properly

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

Re: [Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

Re: [Django] #31262: Support dictionaries in Field.choices for named groups.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

Re: [Django] #31262: Support dictionaries in Field.choices for named groups.

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

[Django] #34923: MESSAGE_TAGS ignored in 5.0a1

Re: [Django] #34899: Model Field.choices callable support is not actually lazy

Re: [Django] #34920: FileExtensionValidator.eq() should ignore allowed_extensions order.

Re: [Django] #34118: Python 3.12 compatibility

25 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information