On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Ramiro Morales <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since then I've opened ticket [2]#7420 with a patch that would reduce the list
> of things needed to patch in Django to just *one item: Taking in account the
> fact that in pyodbc seems to be the only DB-API2 adapter
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Ramiro Morales <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jack Moffitt, mamcx (and everyone interested),
>
> I've been working in my free time for the last few days on updating the
> pyodbc-based MS SQL Server backend so it a) can be an external Django
> backend and b) to
Jack Moffitt, mamcx (and everyone interested),
I've been working in my free time for the last few days on updating the
pyodbc-based MS SQL Server backend so it a) can be an external Django
backend and b) to post qs-rf merge.
First I tried to participate by testing django-pyodbc and opening a
+1 on trac milestones. I think it's important that people start to see
what will be done when and what features will get pushed off to 1.0.
Milestones, at least for me as a growing developer, have always
provided that extra motivation as the progress meter approaches 100%.
Just seems more
Hello,
I need to draw some quick attention to media handling in newforms-
admin. Ticket #7129 [1] was opened with the intension of the old
admin's behavior with the js inner Admin option. The trunk
documentation states:
If you use relative URLs — URLs that don’t start with http:// or / —
As one of the guys that try to do the MS-Sql part:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5062
I must say that I sell a internal semi-store with that code, integrate
later http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5246 and work fine.
But feel that the django people discourage the work at all. First,
Ville Säävuori wrote:
> The point of deadlines are that people tend to try to make them come
> true. If there is something that I've learned as a project manager
> during all the years that I've worked as one, it's that deadlines are
> important.
My main point was that the deadline should be
As proposed by mrts, I'd like to take the discussion from #3591 [1]
here.
A note on InstalledAppsRevision [2]: I like most of it (especially
`db_prefix`) but cannot see the value of having multiple instances of
the same app. Is there an example that illustrates why this is needed
I'd like to bring up trac milestones again.
Currently Django has over 1000 active tickets. Some of them are
relevant to oldforms-admin, some are from pre-qsrf merge, some are
features for 1.1. But quite a few are small bugs that should be fixed
before 1.0.
Putting up milestones in trac would
Jacob, I feel your pain butty.
Do what you think is right, django has been brilliant so far.
The jump to version 1(lightspeed) has been a bit of a nightmare, but let's
all remember a pre django world.
I for one trust Jacob's judgement.
Just do it mate, there's good good people who want to
On 11 Jūn., 03:45, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 6:46 AM, Edgars Jēkabsons
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
...
> > I understand that I can help by triaging the 341 unreviewed, I can't
> > at the moment imagine doing design decisions in the name of
> So what's the point of hoping for September if it's not real?
The point of deadlines are that people tend to try to make them come
true. If there is something that I've learned as a project manager
during all the years that I've worked as one, it's that deadlines are
important.
Its not as
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And this is great of course. But having to develop externally away
> from the many eyes of the Django community is sort of an impairment.
> It's a lot easier to get traction on a project that is in the Django
> repo
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 16:39, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> 5. Model-level validation (#6845).
> [...]
>> and i thought it's in the plan to have this in 1.0.
>
> It is, assuming it gets done.
Honza Král
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ#: 107471613
Phone: +420 606 678585
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:32, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "Maybe" features
>>
>>
> .
> .
> .
>>
>>
On Jun 12, 8:51 am, "Marty Alchin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 7:06 AM, Forest Bond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think that this is a must-have:
>
> > #285 -- WSGI SCRIPT_NAME and PATH_INFO stuff
>
> Then you'll be glad to know that it's #3 the list of "Must-have
>
Le 9 juin 08 à 19:11, Marty Alchin a écrit :
> I've been fairly quiet on the file storage front for a while, since
> it's basically done now, and is just waiting on the streaming upload
> ticket to hit trunk first. Since I got to that point, however, I've
> had two different people, working on
> > The schedule looks good. I think you should be hardlined about the
> > dates and not as hardlined on what makes it in.
>
> That's the plan. Only the "blocker" features actually can delay the
> release, and I expect them to be done (sans bug fixes) by that alpha
> date.
What I meant was, if
On Jun 12, 4:43 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 8:42 AM, Remco Wendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Will the API be frozen from the alpha release? Or is this a beta
> > release thing?
>
> I'm not sure... I think probably beta 1 should be the API
Le 9 juin 08 à 13:52, David Larlet a écrit :
>
> Le 8 juin 08 à 16:11, Ivan Sagalaev a écrit :
>>
>> David Larlet wrote:
>>> This is not a secret that I'm interested in both Django and Semantic
>>> Web. I'm following discussion about Django+REST for more than two
>>> years and when I realize
> > I have to ask why must Django prevent work in this regard?
>
> To be perfectly fair, it's not really "prevented". Django supports the
> use of database backends not defined in Django itself, so third-party
> development of backends is unimpaired.
And this is great of course. But having to
I dont' think it's a usage question about Django.
Django has a coding paradigm. Availability and usage of a meta model
would permit to have a configuring paradigm and would make django
generation easier. The development of django itself could be impacted.
PS: I will post my message on user
El mar, 10-06-2008 a las 09:54 -0400, Karen Tracey escribió:
> I agree the error message could be better.
>
Thanks for the elaborate and concise answer, I'll work on a nicer error
message then ;)
Should the error raise a ProgrammingError or ValueError ?
--
http://www.marcfargas.com -- will
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 8:42 AM, Remco Wendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Will the API be frozen from the alpha release? Or is this a beta
> release thing?
I'm not sure... I think probably beta 1 should be the API freeze, but
it's possible that with all the new features due at that point we
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Gábor Farkas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> 5. Model-level validation (#6845).
[...]
> and i thought it's in the plan to have this in 1.0.
It is, assuming it gets done. Last I check Honza was working on it,
and if he's still interested I expect he'd be able
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Luke Plant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First, I think you meant #730
> Second, I think this needs to be a must have, or at least the current
> behaviour must be *documented*. See discussion on #749
Yup, I meant #730, and I think you're right that we should
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:18 AM, Ivan Sagalaev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ouch... To paraphrase Joel Spolsky "If you have a hand-wavy feature
> called "1.0 release" and you schedule 3 months for it, you are doomed".
> Jacob, honestly, where this date has come from? It can as easily be
> August
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have to ask why must Django prevent work in this regard?
It's not so much about "preventing" work -- nobody here works *for*
me, and I can't really tell anybody what to do. It's more about
focusing priorities. So
+1 on getting a release out there as soon as humanly possible ;)
On Jun 12, 4:03 am, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * An alpha release containing all must-have features, but likely not
> bug-free. We'll push hard to have all the must-haves done in time
> for ample testing.
Ville Säävuori wrote:
> Firstly, as Jacob said, the schedule is just a draft at this point.
> But I'm very much +1 on locking down spesific dates for any given
> milestone. It's vital to have firm schedule and dates for making it
> all happen in a relatively short period of time.
If this is
On Thursday 12 June 2008 03:03:21 Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> 11. Better support for controlling middleware ordering (#3591).
First, I think you meant #730
Second, I think this needs to be a must have, or at least the current
behaviour must be *documented*. See discussion on #749
Thanks,
Okay, the patch is good to go. Looking forward to seeing it in trunk!
-Lau
On Jun 9, 6:43 pm, Joe Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would be a big help for implementing backends for appengine.
>
> I did notice a project working on an appengine helper for Django
> managed to also
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 7:06 AM, Forest Bond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that this is a must-have:
>
> #285 -- WSGI SCRIPT_NAME and PATH_INFO stuff
Then you'll be glad to know that it's #3 the list of "Must-have
features" in Jacob's email, just a bit below the portion you quoted.
-Gul
On Jun 12, 12:46 pm, Ville Säävuori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And FWIW, I think the proposed roadmap is brilliant. Not too many
> features but still enough to make most of us very happy. Especially if
> we can get at least few of the maybes in.
Agreed. It is great to see a concrete plan
> Jacob, honestly, where this date has come from? It can as easily be
> August or October. You've outlined a good feature list and seem resolute
> to stick to it. But unless all those lieutenants would plan their
> features *in work hours*, you just can't know the date.
Firstly, as Jacob said,
Hi,
On Jun 11, 10:03 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Must-haves: features that, if not completed, are worth delaying the
> release. That is, if the work on this list is not completed by a
> release date, we'll push the date.
I think that this is a must-have:
#285
Wow, I'd say this is a pretty good schedule, Jacob.
> So we'd like to deal with that situation a bit specially. I've
> unfortunately not
> had a chance to ask Thejaswi (the student working on comments) or
> Jannis (his
> mentor) about this, so obviously they'll need to be OK with the idea.
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Django 1.0 will be released in early September.
Ouch... To paraphrase Joel Spolsky "If you have a hand-wavy feature
called "1.0 release" and you schedule 3 months for it, you are doomed".
Jacob, honestly, where this date has come from? It can as easily be
August or
I came across the need today to modify PhoneNumberField to allow for
International phone numbers. Doing so, it occurred to me, it'd be very
useful just to be able to swap out my phone number field with the
localized version based on whatever country was selected.
Has any thought/real-use
Hi Jacob,
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 7. Land GeoDjango as ``django.contrib.gis``.
Not that I have any right to say anything ... but should this really
be a django contrib ? Isn't it more of an external application ?
Regards
Rajeev J
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Maybe" features
>
>
.
.
.
>
> 5. Model-level validation (#6845).
hi,
it always seems quite ugly, that you can create a model with invalid data,
and save it. so when you want to validate it's
Not sure exactly how to phrase this, but James told me to bring these tickets
up
here to get some feedback on them - such as what exactly needs done to bring
them to 'ready for checkin' as myself and others would like to get them in :)
I did the basics of making sure the patches were updated,
Jean-Christophe Kermagoret said the following:
> I need this meta model to generate automatically django code from models.
>
> If there is no meta model, is there presently some code which would
> permit to have code automatically generated from xml (or properly
> properties) configuration
43 matches
Mail list logo
