I agree. In programming world, a 'user' is actually someone that
develops something with that framework or programming language. This
is quite contrast compared to OS world. The term 'Linux user' would
imply someone that actually use Linux, while Linux developers would
imply someone that is
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Henrique Romano wrote:
> On May 6, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
>> 2. Does the patch contain a test?
>> 3. Does the test fail if the rest of the patch isn't applied?
In principle, you can answer these together. Apply the
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:43 PM, James Bennett wrote:
> There are no "intuitive" or "right" names, really ("django-core"
> wouldn't work because this list is for more people than just the
> "core" team, for example -- nothing short of
>
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> Better names for django-users and django-developer would have been
> django-developer and django-core, respectively. Calling this list
> "developer" wasn't such a great idea--the users of Django *are*
> developers;
Better names for django-users and django-developer would have been
django-developer and django-core, respectively. Calling this list
"developer" wasn't such a great idea--the users of Django *are*
developers; they're developing with Django. No amount of tweaking the
list description is going to
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 12:33 PM, lemming110 wrote:
>
> I am trying to use the select keyword in extra. But I cannot properly
> quote the the expression for postrgres. I am using the
> django.contrib.comments. I started with this snippet
>
I am trying to use the select keyword in extra. But I cannot properly
quote the the expression for postrgres. I am using the
django.contrib.comments. I started with this snippet
http://www.djangosnippets.org/snippets/1101/ which returns the number
of comments for an object. However, the code
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Malcolm Tredinnick
wrote:
> The choice to be made in an API implementation of this kind is whether
> NULL checks on fields in related models implies a related instance
> exists or not. Django follows SQL there and doesn't insist that a
>
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Armin Ronacher
wrote:
> All bugs are fixed now except for #10788. Now the problem with
> closing that one is that this one requires a design descision. I
> updated the ticket accordingly for jacob or anyone else to decide on
> it.
Hi,
All bugs are fixed now except for #10788. Now the problem with
closing that one is that this one requires a design descision. I
updated the ticket accordingly for jacob or anyone else to decide on
it. My personal opinion is that I consider it bad design for the
application to depend on
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Michael Radziej wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, Gábor Farkas wrote:
>
>> Group.objects.filter(person__stamp__isnull=True)
>>
>> i get an OUTER JOIN,
>>
>> but if i do this:
>>
>> Group.objects.filter(person__stamp='2008-12-12')
>>
>> i get an INNER
On Mon, May 11, Gábor Farkas wrote:
> i'd like to discuss ticket 10032, because it was closed as WONTFIX,
> ...
> Group.objects.filter(person__stamp__isnull=True)
>
> i get an OUTER JOIN,
>
> but if i do this:
>
> Group.objects.filter(person__stamp='2008-12-12')
>
> i get an INNER JOIN.
>
>
hi,
i'd like to discuss ticket 10032, because it was closed as WONTFIX,
and i think the issue i raised was somehow misundersood,
perhaps i explained it the wrong way.
the problem is that i'm filtering a queryset
by doing a join using a foreign-key in the "opposite way",
and django sometimes
13 matches
Mail list logo