Well dang! "Magic" just happened.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <
russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote:
>
> Strictly, it needs to be put on a deprecation path, because it *is*
> documented, in ref/settings.txt. So the earliest we can truly remove
> it is in 1.5, after a PendingDeprecationWarning in 1.3 and a full
undocumented on purpose:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9530
<http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9530>Moving forward, I'll be skipping
the comment-specific setting and simply setting PROFANITIES_LIST to (). Any
chance we'll see the setting removed in the near future?
Best Regards
the concepts around the File
wrapper... It's all a bit much for a newcomer to the project.
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Owen Nelson <onel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd love to pitch in on updating the docs for file handling :)
>
>
--
You received this message because you a
I'd love to pitch in on updating the docs for file handling :)
Even though this kind of talk is better suited over on django-users, here's
one way to skin a cat.
I had a view that displayed a model form (one of the fields was a
FileField). I needed to alter the resolution of the uploaded image
I the first time I went through the trouble of refactoring a large set of
models into a package I couldn't figure out why my models were "missing".
Took me a while to trawl through a number of blog posts to come across the
app_label requirement/mechanism. At the time, I don't think it was
In this case you're compressing at runtime... or am I missing something?
I think I'm just going to burrow for a little while and prototype some
helpers. I've got a project coming up shortly with some room for R on
this front, so hopefully I'll be able to put them into production for a
while
Kevin Howerton wrote:
> The widget and admin media system needs to be re-evaluated IMO
> none of these solutions are going to address the flaws you are
> referring to.
>
"Flaws", sounds a bit harsh :P Let's alias that as "room for improvement".
I'd agree that wrangling hashes and
I've read hpws, but not the sequel. I suppose following that train of
thought, there should be the option for using 2 separate stacks - one
for the head of the document, and one for the tail (stylesheets at the
top and scripts at the bottom!)
> "These aren't something we could easily incorporate.
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> If you'd like to look into it, a good place to start would be by
> looking at the existing static asset management tools in the ecosystem...
>
I most certainly would like to. I'll prepare a "report" with my findings.
--
You received this message because you are
mething I've briefly considered, but started
foaming at the mouth as a result.
I've also considered the fact that the reaction here might be, "just
don't - leave it all in the individual's hands".
In closing... don't hit me!
Regards,
Owen Nelson
--
You received this message because you are s
11 matches
Mail list logo
