Re: Papal module configuration in SATCHMO module

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Tariq Mahmood wrote: > Assalam O Alaikum > > when i click for purchase item from my store following error appears. > please tell me what is the problem. is it any problem with satchmo > paypal module configuration Django-developers is for

Papal module configuration in SATCHMO module

Assalam O Alaikum when i click for purchase item from my store following error appears. please tell me what is the problem. is it any problem with satchmo paypal module configuration ERROR AT PAYPAL SAND BOX SITE We cannot process this transaction because there is a problem with the PayPal

Re: Gentle Proposal: add 'render' shortcut in 1.3

2010/10/29 Mikhail Korobov : > Hi Russel, > > Thank you for your reviews and moving things on! > > On 29 окт, 07:35, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: >> >> I like this idea -- it's is an elegant solution to the problem, and >> avoids all the backwards

Re: contrib.staticfiles and runserver

On Oct 28, 9:45 pm, SmileyChris wrote: > My suggestion is that StaticFilesHandler only does its magic if > 'django.contrib.staticfiles' is found in INSTALLED_APPS. Does that > sound acceptable? That seems like a very reasonable opt-in approach that solves the

Re: contrib.staticfiles app concerns

Hi Waldemar, Thanks for putting so much thought into this issue, and outlining these options in detail. However, I am not convinced that this something Django core should be concerned with. I think we need to maintain a clearer conceptual separation between the various layers of functionality

Re: More efficient negative lookups

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 6:59 AM, George Vilches wrote: > > > On Oct 27, 5:55 pm, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: >> > I'm inclined to say we do the former -- restore the "ne"

Re: Gentle Proposal: add 'render' shortcut in 1.3

Hi Russel, Thank you for your reviews and moving things on! On 29 окт, 07:35, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > I like this idea -- it's is an elegant solution to the problem, and > avoids all the backwards compatibility issues I can think of. > > I have two comments: > >

Re: contrib.staticfiles and runserver

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 9:45 AM, SmileyChris wrote: > It's cool that runserver takes away the hassle of needing to add in > your static url (is this documented? I didn't find it in my skim) but > doing it by default seems pretty backwards incompatible, even if we > are just

Re: contrib.staticfiles and runserver

On Oct 29, 2:45 pm, SmileyChris wrote: > doing it by default seems pretty backwards incompatible, even if we I was a bit terse, let me expand. STATICFILES_URL defaults to '/static/'. The StaticFilesHandler (which is now what is used by runserver) swallows requests to this

Re: It is real to add ticket #8054 to 1.3 milestone?

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Alex Kamedov wrote: > Hi All. Big thanks to response! >> >> > Am I correct and the goal is only to change list_display syntax? >> Yes, I don't see any other goal either, so I have controversial >> feelings about the issue. >> It has only syntax

contrib.staticfiles and runserver

It's cool that runserver takes away the hassle of needing to add in your static url (is this documented? I didn't find it in my skim) but doing it by default seems pretty backwards incompatible, even if we are just talking about the dev server. My suggestion is that StaticFilesHandler only does

Re: Gentle Proposal: add 'render' shortcut in 1.3

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Ivan Sagalaev wrote: > On 10/27/2010 04:55 PM, Mikhail Korobov wrote: >> >> 1. 'Border' middleware is a backwards-compatible change, the >> requirement to bake response in middleware isn't. >> >> The >> difference is only that you

Re: Ticket #7817: Extending "with" and "include" tags.

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 3:46 PM, SmileyChris wrote: > On Oct 27, 5:35 am, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: >> I would like to bring this up again, because this is something that >> would really improve readability of my templates. I'm mainly >> interested in

Re: New localflavor: Turkey

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Ekrem SEREN wrote: > 2010/10/28 Serkan Kenar >>> Thirdly, the patch needs verification by a third party, preferably >> I think we have to wait for somebody to raise his/her hand here. I don't >> know anybody else in

Re: Custum permission bug

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Narciso Oceguera wrote: > Hi, everyone. > > As documentation said, I just added the lines: > > class USCitizen(models.Model): >   # ... > >   class Meta: >       permissions = ( >           ("can_drive", "Can drive"), >           ("can_vote", "Can

Re: Feature request: ForeignKey through parameter

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Roald de Vries wrote: > I quite often reference foreign keys of foreign keys of foreign keys... > Wouldn't it be nice to have a 'through'-parameter for ForeignKey's? > >    class A(Model): >        b = ForeignKey('B') >        c =

Re: Feature request: ForeignKey through parameter

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Roald de Vries wrote: > On first sight, I think I agree with you that the syntax is cleaner like > this, but I would choose for the through-parameter because it's more > consistent with the use of the through-parameter for ManyToManyField. but

Re: Google Code-in: any volunteers?

Hey all, After speaking with Jacob I've put together our application. One of the components of which is having a list of tasks for students. The application is due tomorrow, so there isn't a ton of time, but I've started a wikipage where people can suggest ideas, so if you have anything that

Re: Gentle Proposal: add 'render' shortcut in 1.3

On 10/28/2010 12:24 PM, Mikhail Korobov wrote: The request handling code have to be put into WSGIHandler and into ModPythonHandler so I'll wait until the patch for http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9886 will be landed. I'd say it's even worth to wait for

Re: contrib.staticfiles app concerns

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Waldemar Kornewald wrote: > What's the problem with all of this? Code written for (1) is > incompatible with code written for (2) which is incompatible with code > written for (4). The asset managers listed on djangopackages use any > of

Re: contrib.staticfiles app concerns

Hi Yuri, On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:18 PM, burc...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi Waldemar, > > it seems I just don't get what does "relative to" mean in your (1)-(4). > Could you please explain better, what do you mean by that? > Starting with what path does your "css/main.css" have? >

Re: Feature request: ForeignKey through parameter

On Oct 28, 2010, at 4:02 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote: On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Roald de Vries wrote: I quite often reference foreign keys of foreign keys of foreign keys... Wouldn't it be nice to have a 'through'-parameter for ForeignKey's? class

Re: Feature request: ForeignKey through parameter

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Roald de Vries wrote: > I quite often reference foreign keys of foreign keys of foreign keys... > Wouldn't it be nice to have a 'through'-parameter for ForeignKey's? > > >    class A(Model): >        b = ForeignKey('B') >        c =

Re: New localflavor: Turkey

2010/10/28 Serkan Kenar >> Thirdly, the patch needs verification by a third party, preferably > I think we have to wait for somebody to raise his/her hand here. I don't know > anybody else in the community who is familiar with Turkish. I believe I can test this. I just

Custum permission bug

Hi, everyone. As documentation said, I just added the lines: class USCitizen(models.Model): # ... class Meta: permissions = ( ("can_drive", "Can drive"), ("can_vote", "Can vote in elections"), ("can_drink", "Can drink alcohol"), ) But after

Re: More efficient negative lookups

On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:55 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: >> I'm inclined to say we do the former -- restore the "ne" lookup type >> -- because it's a quick fix, and ask somebody to write up a patch for >> the latter.

Re: contrib.staticfiles app concerns

Hi Waldemar, it seems I just don't get what does "relative to" mean in your (1)-(4). Could you please explain better, what do you mean by that? Starting with what path does your "css/main.css" have? I think you've missed some important bits in your explanations, or just not covering every

Re: New localflavor: Turkey

Hi Russel, On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > It's certainly possible. However, the patch still needs a little work. > Thank you for the review. I have completed the following requests, but only missing a third party confirmation. You can

Re: Gentle Proposal: add 'render' shortcut in 1.3

On 28 окт, 12:55, Ivan Sagalaev wrote: > On 10/27/2010 04:55 PM, Mikhail Korobov wrote: > > > 1. 'Border' middleware is a backwards-compatible change, the > > requirement to bake response in middleware isn't. > > > The > > difference is only that you propose to execute

Feature request: ForeignKey through parameter

Dear all, I quite often reference foreign keys of foreign keys of foreign keys... Wouldn't it be nice to have a 'through'-parameter for ForeignKey's? class A(Model): b = ForeignKey('B') c = ForeignKey('C', through='B', related_name='a_set') class B(Model):

Re: It is real to add ticket #8054 to 1.3 milestone?

Hi All. Big thanks to response! > Am I correct and the goal is only to change list_display syntax? > Yes, I don't see any other goal either, so I have controversial > feelings about the issue. > It has only syntax sugar, but that sugar is very sweet. Hm. Yes, it provide only syntax sugar. But

Re: Gentle Proposal: add 'render' shortcut in 1.3

On 10/27/2010 04:55 PM, Mikhail Korobov wrote: 1. 'Border' middleware is a backwards-compatible change, the requirement to bake response in middleware isn't. The difference is only that you propose to execute 'bake' in the end of response cycle and I propose to execute it at the beginning of

Re: contrib.staticfiles app concerns

Hi Yuri, On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 6:19 AM, burc...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi Waldemar, > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Waldemar Kornewald > wrote: >> 2010/10/27 Mikhail Korobov : >>> Why isn't it fine to have different URL