Does it make sense for execute_sql to raise StopIteration even when
it's called with a result_type other than MULTI?
Encountered while porting GIS. :)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django develop
On 12/1/07, Julien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3397 is looking at
> that issue and seems to provide a good alternative for ordering non-db
> fields. Is that patch viable?
It's viable for a very limited use -- if you can specify a real database
fi
The ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3397 is looking at
that issue and seems to provide a good alternative for ordering non-db
fields. Is that patch viable?
On Dec 2, 3:03 pm, Julien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I find that displaying non-db fields is quite useless if you c
Hi all,
I find that displaying non-db fields is quite useless if you can't
order/filter them...
How would you approach the filtering and ordering of non-db fields in
the admin interface? Would you try to customize the newforms-admin
(and if so, how?) or add a built-in feature in the admin code?
On Nov 29, 10:33 pm, "Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Without further ado, here's my list:
>
> * newforms-admin
> * queryset-refactor
> * django.newforms becomes django.forms
> * Model-level validation
> * Change django.templatetags not to use __path__ hacking
> * #3591 -- Make INS
On 11/30/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Coincidentally, Jacob and I were talking about this the other day,
> mostly discussing the issues without attempting to reach a final
> conclusion. My personal opinion is that it should be tossed. It hasn't
> worked for ages and until so
I must have missed this part, I can now run single tests!
Thanks for the pointer Michael.
El sáb, 01-12-2007 a las 16:02 -0500, Empty escribió:
> Read this page entirely and it should help:
>
> http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/contributing/
>
> specifically regarding running a single t
> I'd like to see a patch that
> aliased "simple" to "locmem" and raised a DeprecationWarning. We'll
> then remove simple in 1.0.
Done: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6086
> > * Should the "file" backend's _file_for_key method be rewritten to use
> > hashes instead of cleaned-up strings? I
Read this page entirely and it should help:
http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/contributing/
specifically regarding running a single test see:
http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/contributing/#running-the-unit-tests
Michael Trier
blog.michaeltrier.com
On Dec 1, 2007 3:53 PM, Ma
Hi people,
When one "newbie" wants to create a patch with tests for Django (which
are a requirement for every ticket) he/She can get a bit confused.
Maybe one knows how to write tests for his/her own applications so the
first thing to try will be something like:
django//tests.py
this is only
+1. I agree with Simon's reasoning.
Simon Willison wrote:
> On Nov 30, 6:33 am, "Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think we ought to call the release 2.0.
>
> I'm -0.5 on this (if that's possible). I understand the thinking
> behind it, but "1.0" isn't an arbitrary version number
Hey all,
I'm a (roughly) mid-level Python coder, and newly interested in Django.
I work at a university library on a library archive digitization
project. We have a large collection, with several thousand heterogenous
documents (ranging in size and format from letters to books, interviews
and po
On Dec 1, 9:44 am, pbx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * The "simple" backend seems obsolete. The newer "locmem" is
> functionally equivalent for the user, but is suitable for deployment
> as well as development. Should "simple" be removed? This might allow
> refactoring of the backend code to simpli
Looking in the query generation code (for both trunk and queryset-
refactor), there's special case code for RegEx clauses and Oracle, as
Oracle uses a function call syntax instead of an operator syntax.
It would be great to have this generalized for use with other engines.
SQL Server has no built
A while ago I was picking through the cache system and found a few
things that seemed like they could use cleanup. I'm interested in
hearing thoughts on which of these might be worth pursuing, whether
today or later.
* The "simple" backend seems obsolete. The newer "locmem" is
functionally equiva
On Dec 1, 5:00 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> To a python developer who is unfamiliar with django's magic limiting
> syntax, the slice there looks unnecessary.
If/when we get a __nonzero__ method, it will be unnecessary.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
On Dec 1, 5:24 am, "Karen Tracey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the issue of what to call 1.0, I like Max Battcher's idea of adopting an
> Ubuntu-like date-based version. Puts some useful information (how old is
> it?) into the release name and avoids preconceived notions of
> stability/complet
17 matches
Mail list logo
