Re: Suggestion for #1602, urlify.js blocks out non-English chars

2006-07-11 Thread Andrey Golovizin
Bill de hÓra wrote: > I need to test this properly and fill in the mappings The official Cyrillic-Latin mapping could be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translit It could be like this: var RUSSIAN_MAP = { "а": "a","к": "k","х": "kh, "б": "b","л": "l","ц": "ts", "в":

Re: would is_loggedin be better than is_anonymous?

2006-07-11 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 21:34 -0700, Gary Wilson wrote: > Thinking of this some more, I'm wondering about the names is_logged_in > or is_authenticated. They could be a little misleading since they > aren't really checking if the user is logged in or not. One might be > led to believe that they

Re: would is_loggedin be better than is_anonymous?

2006-07-11 Thread Gary Wilson
Thinking of this some more, I'm wondering about the names is_logged_in or is_authenticated. They could be a little misleading since they aren't really checking if the user is logged in or not. One might be led to believe that they could do something like logged_in_users = [user.is_logged_in()

Re: would is_loggedin be better than is_anonymous?

2006-07-11 Thread SmileyChris
I like it too. To attone for my duplicate thread, I have created a ticket and patch for this. http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2332 I'm not sure how you "declare is_anonymous as depreciated", Malcom so I'll leave that to you ;) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You

Re: Suggestion for #1602, urlify.js blocks out non-English chars [was urlify.js blocks out...]

2006-07-11 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 02:54 +0100, Bill de hÓra wrote: > Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > > Personally, I was kind of hoping whoever wrote > > the patch might think this sort of thing through and give us a concrete > > target to throw ideas at. :-) > > Hi Malcolm, > > Here we go: aah ... batter

Suggestion for #1602, urlify.js blocks out non-English chars [was urlify.js blocks out...]

2006-07-11 Thread Bill de hÓra
Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > Personally, I was kind of hoping whoever wrote > the patch might think this sort of thing through and give us a concrete > target to throw ideas at. :-) Hi Malcolm, Here we go: [[[urlify.js: var LATIN_MAP = { 'À':'A', 'Á':'A',

Re: Templates and user.is_anonymous

2006-07-11 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:52 -0700, SmileyChris wrote: > When using templates and the user interface, the logic seems backwards > to check for an anonymous user as opposed to a logged in user. > > By using user.is_anonymous in a template, you assume that if it's false > then the user is logged

How to change foreign key deletion behaviour?

2006-07-11 Thread Iain Duncan
I asked about this on the user list and was told it has been noticed as an issue, but in the meantime, I need to find a way to make sure that in the admin interface related entries ( through tables connected by a foreign key ) do not get automatically deleted, but rather have the foreign key in

Templates and user.is_anonymous

2006-07-11 Thread SmileyChris
When using templates and the user interface, the logic seems backwards to check for an anonymous user as opposed to a logged in user. By using user.is_anonymous in a template, you assume that if it's false then the user is logged in, where in actual fact "user" may just not be getting passed to

Re: Multi-db branch feedback/questions

2006-07-11 Thread Daniel Poelzleithner
> OK, thoughts, anyone? When i first heard of multi-db i more thought about support for clustering then moving some apps/models to other databases, which is great, too of course. for example: having one master db and some slave dbs that mirror the master db. requests should go to slaves in some

Re: Multi-db branch feedback/questions

2006-07-11 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Replying to myself... here's what I've come up with to explain the problems I see in my current implementation and what I think should be done to fix them. Apologies in advance -- it's quite long. I've implemented a bit of this just to make sure it would work, mainly the basic parts in

Broken internal links

2006-07-11 Thread Luke Plant
Hi, Django's check for internal/external links (via the HTTP_REFERER header) is pretty naïve, and it means I'm currently getting tons of e-mails telling me I have broken *internal* links, when actually they are external links from Google's cache, which happens to contain the domain in the

i18n: messages in generic views

2006-07-11 Thread Michael Radziej
Hi, Generic views set messages, but don't enable translation, such as: if not request.user.is_anonymous(): request.user.message_set.create(message="The %s was updated successfully." % model._meta.verbose_name) This is only an example, there are other similar cases. Shouldn't this get

Re: Manipulators going away?

2006-07-11 Thread Jorge Gajon
Hi! Is there a page about these plans on the wiki? I'm interested in seeing how this will change since I currently have around 300+ lines of custom manipulators code in a single project. Of course I'm also interested in seeing if I can help in any way. Thanks! Jorge On 7/11/06, favo <[EMAIL

Yet another cookie setting: secure

2006-07-11 Thread Michael Radziej
Hi, I propose to add a setting that makes cookies 'secure'. The secure flag tells the browser to send this cookie only over https. The idea is that https makes sure that the cookie does not leak out to a domain that belongs to someone else, even when the DNS has been tampered. Since the

Re: Multi-db branch feedback/questions

2006-07-11 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip most of OTHER_DATABASES proposal] > * ``MODELS`` is a list. Each item in the list may be: > > * ``app_label.module_name`` if a single model should be use this > connection. > * ``app_label`` if the entire app should use this connection > > How does this sound? Good enough for

Re: Multi-db branch feedback/questions

2006-07-11 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> What about making Manager callable? It could take a database > identifier, or even an object with connection info, and return a new > Manager instance with the specified database info. This would let you > keep using Model.objects with a default database, or for the case where > multiple

Re: Multi-db branch feedback/questions

2006-07-11 Thread Jacob Kaplan-Moss
On Jul 11, 2006, at 8:08 AM, jason pellerin wrote: > Here's another case that I'd like to see handled gracefully, that I > think can be handled better with your proposed syntax than mine: one > app with many models, some of which use a named connection. To me, the > ideal way to handle that would

Re: Manipulators going away?

2006-07-11 Thread favo
Hope new manipulator replacement is flexible and with some back backward compatible. we have many funcition based on custom manipulator(form ) or automatic ones. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: Multi-db branch feedback/questions

2006-07-11 Thread jason pellerin
A wrinkle occurred to me last night that I really should have thought of earlier, and that calls into question my whole connection-handling setup. When served as a WSGI app in a container like Paste, settings can be different on every request. That means, first off, that however we decide to

Re: Enabling Row Level Permissions

2006-07-11 Thread Chris L
> It looks okay and you are protecting with a conditional test that checks > for the right attribute being present. What problems are you seeing? > It's pretty easy to get into a knot in the __new__() method there, but > from the fragment you posted you seem to have avoided the obvious >

Translation problem when not logged in

2006-07-11 Thread Gribbie
Hi I have an application which when the user is logged in translates using: request.session['django_language']='en-uk' or what ever language code they select. This works fine when the user is logged in but I'd like to offer the user the option to translate the "welcome" screen. I've done

Re: Manipulators going away?

2006-07-11 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 03:15 -0700, Bjørn Stabell wrote: > Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > You're right -- models will gain validation, and there will be a > > helper function/method that returns a data structure that encapsulates > > form validation/redisplay (like a Manipulator currently does).

Re: Manipulators going away?

2006-07-11 Thread Bjørn Stabell
Adrian Holovaty wrote: > You're right -- models will gain validation, and there will be a > helper function/method that returns a data structure that encapsulates > form validation/redisplay (like a Manipulator currently does). That'll > be replacing the current "automatic" manipulators, which

Re: a Caching model.manager

2006-07-11 Thread Ian Holsman
On 11/07/2006, at 12:22 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > > Tricky implementation ("tricky" != "bad"), but it looks like it should > work more or less. Don't you need to override every public method of > QuerySet, not just get() (e.g. filter(), order_by()...)? hmm. we could use