#7611 contrib.auth PasswordResetTest requires specific templates for tests to pass

Re: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7611 The current situation is that if you create a new Django project and run the unit tests, the contrib.auth baisc tests fail due to missing templates. These templates are provided by the admin app, which is not installed by default. Russell brought

Django on Python 2.6

A beta 2 release of Python 2.6 was released yesterday or so, and they are on a schedule to have a final release around the same time Django 1.0 is scheduled. Actually, slightly after, but who knows with scheduling code releases which one will actually reach 'final' first. Right now,

Re: newforms-admin branch has been merged into trunk

Giggidy giggidy. On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Julien Phalip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks Brian, Karen and all the NFA team for this massive > contribution!! > > On Jul 19, 10:01 am, Brian Rosner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have just recently merged the newforms-admin branch

Re: newforms-admin branch has been merged into trunk

Thanks Brian, Karen and all the NFA team for this massive contribution!! On Jul 19, 10:01 am, Brian Rosner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have just recently merged the newforms-admin branch into trunk as of   > r7967 [1]. This is an extremely backward incompatible change. The   > entire admin

newforms-admin branch has been merged into trunk

I have just recently merged the newforms-admin branch into trunk as of r7967 [1]. This is an extremely backward incompatible change. The entire admin application in contrib has been refactored. The newforms module has a few new features, but those changes are backward compatible. The

Re: DjangoCon

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Frijole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone know how to get tickets for the DjangoCon, I though they > were releasing them today? When the time comes there will be a large and loud public announcement that you will not be able to miss. -- "Bureaucrat

Re: Please Apply #5801 - GET parameters are ignored in redirect for Admin

New patch with tests added to the ticket. Shows the reason for the triage process! All the best Ross On Jul 18, 2:54 pm, Rozza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Russell, > > I write the tests and attach to the ticket asap. > > Ross > > On Jul 18, 2:01 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL

Re: url template tag, unhelpful when failing

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 19:30 +0200, Mikael Moutakis wrote: >> Hi >> I've running from trunk and recently switched to the NFA-branch. I >> found that the URL templatetag is unhelpful when failing to match a >> url.

Re: url template tag, unhelpful when failing

On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 19:30 +0200, Mikael Moutakis wrote: > Hi > I've running from trunk and recently switched to the NFA-branch. I > found that the URL templatetag is unhelpful when failing to match a > url. I patched my own copy of the function URLNode in > django.template.defaulttags to

DjangoCon

Does anyone know how to get tickets for the DjangoCon, I though they were releasing them today? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to

url template tag, unhelpful when failing

Hi I've running from trunk and recently switched to the NFA-branch. I found that the URL templatetag is unhelpful when failing to match a url. I patched my own copy of the function URLNode in django.template.defaulttags to return a more helpful error message instead of a empty string. Should I

Re: Please Apply #5801 - GET parameters are ignored in redirect for Admin

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM, Rozza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ah no problems! > > As there aren't any tests for the staff_member_required or even > request.get_full_path() I wasn't 100% sure what the procedure would be > as these are used through out Django. > > As it's such a minor

Re: ~Q broken?

Fair enough! I'll do a workaround. Thanks, Göran On Jul 18, 4:54 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 04:11 -0700, Göran Åström wrote: > > Thank you for answering and for the workaround tip. > > I agree, exclude should be the complement of filter. This did

Re: MS SQL pyodbc backend update to trunk

Fixed, thanks. - Original Message - From: "bob84123" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Django developers" Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 7:51 AM Subject: Re: MS SQL pyodbc backend update to trunk Thanks for that. Turned out the problem I was having was to

Re: ~Q broken?

On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 04:11 -0700, Göran Åström wrote: > Thank you for answering and for the workaround tip. > I agree, exclude should be the complement of filter. This did not work > in 0.96 but works now, which is great. > I don't think however that it is a good idea to let filter(~Q()) mean >

Re: Please Apply #5801 - GET parameters are ignored in redirect for Admin

Thanks Russell, I write the tests and attach to the ticket asap. Ross On Jul 18, 2:01 pm, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM, Rozza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Ah no problems! > > > As there aren't any tests for the staff_member_required or

Re: Please Apply #5801 - GET parameters are ignored in redirect for Admin

Ah no problems! As there aren't any tests for the staff_member_required or even request.get_full_path() I wasn't 100% sure what the procedure would be as these are used through out Django. As it's such a minor change does it warrant the bureaucracy of requiring tests to have it implemented? I

Re: ~Q broken?

Thank you for answering and for the workaround tip. I agree, exclude should be the complement of filter. This did not work in 0.96 but works now, which is great. I don't think however that it is a good idea to let filter(~Q()) mean 'not exists', i.e. be equivalent to 'exclude', for multi valued

Re: Please Apply #5801 - GET parameters are ignored in redirect for Admin

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Rozza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > This is a bump for ticket #5801 it was marked as accepted back in > February but has not yet been applied! > > Apologies if this is against protocol - it just seems this simple > patch has been lost amongst the

Please Apply #5801 - GET parameters are ignored in redirect for Admin

Hi all, This is a bump for ticket #5801 it was marked as accepted back in February but has not yet been applied! Apologies if this is against protocol - it just seems this simple patch has been lost amongst the many! Ross --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this