Here's a good summary of the issues:
http://www.torchbox.com/blog/eu-law-cookies-and-ico
You can skip to the section titled: 'What enforcement have the ICO
announced?'
It looks like enforcement will lean towards the pragmatic.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
I seem to recall a similar problem rears it's ugly head on editable
changelists too.
And obviously it's potentially worse there as n can often be larger.
On May 23, 4:29 pm, Sean Brant wrote:
> If you have ever used a inline in the admin for a model that contained
> a
One small related point.
The admin could benefit from a way of doing negative lookups within
the lookup syntax itself.
Currently there is no way to construct an exclude filter change list
views in the URL.
i.e. If I am writing a custom filterspec or anything else that results
in a URL for a
Hi,
As far as I know this is the only major chunk of Zain's SOC work that
didn't make it into 1.2
There's a ticket for it: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12509
that's at 'design decision needed'
What would be needed to get this rather nice feature into 1.3?
cheers,
Andy
--
You
I recently tried to use the recommended approach for custom user
profiles: http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/auth/#auth-profiles
and all the brick walls I hit were admin related. Whether these are
better fixed in contrib.auth or contrib.admin is hard to say:
1. I can show profile
This is all very timely. Myself and my friend Harry Brignull (who runs
the UX blog http://www.90percentofeverything.com ) have been talking
for a while about the idea of doing some formal usability testing on
the Django admin and this might prove to be the catalyst.
I'll put together our plan and
I can see some benefit in consistency here but what do you do about
saving the current object?
This is a problem in general with any actions performed on the same
screen a change form.
1. User enters the object detail view
2. User changes a field
3. User selects an action.
Does the action apply
I'm pretty sure Zain has made all the inline types sortable on his
admin-ui branch.
On Nov 8, 7:58 am, Tim wrote:
> I very much like the look of that one, but I'm not sure if it
> completely fills the need I want for my own project. All of the
> fields need to be
Another thing that might be useful to cover in the tutorial is the
'building for re-usability' ideas that have devloped via Pinax et al.
Maybe at least one part of the functionality developed in the tutorial
should be in the form an app intended to be used across projects.
Combine this with
I've been hoping a discussion like this would start as soon as 1.1 was
out the door. It would tie in nicely with the Admin GSOC work as well.
I would like to chime in with some ideas for requirements and stay
away from the implementation discussion for now.
1. I think worrying about projects
That's because the backed the wrong framework.
On Aug 19, 9:05 am, Andreas wrote:
> By the way, rails is going agnostic in 3.0... Says it all.
>
> On Aug 18, 4:06 pm, diogobaeder wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
>
> > After reading this
> >
It does get slightly uglier when you have cases such as:
f = CharField(choices=zip
(some_complex_expression_that_generates_a_list,
some_complex_expression_that_generates_a_list))
You don't really want to assign the expression to a variable within
your model and if you put it elsewhere then it
Nice!
Are you planning to do anything to finesse the behaviour of the
'delete' button? It would be nice (especially on selector inlines) if
it looked like items disappeared immediately.
I also feel the admin change pages needs a 'cancel' button. It's quite
counter-intuitive that the way to
Looking good. I'm so looking forward to this. I'll be able to dump a
fair bit of my less attractive code when this gets merged.
As you are knee deep in the code for inlines - how feasible is it ever
going to be to have inlines within inlines? I can imagine the UI
issues along would be thorny but
I have recently been working on an app that was similar enough in
functionality to contrib.sitemaps for me to use that code as a base.
It struck me that the way you register apps with sitemaps was a little
clunky and could use a bit more DRY .
Is there any reason it couldn't adopt the same
I remember seeing a couple of places where some extra template blocks
could help with extending the admin (object-tools springs to mind).
What are the pro's and con's of adding a sprinkling of new blocks?
On Oct 25, 5:14 pm, suuntala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> G'day all,
>
> After a quick
Good news.
I'm sure there are tickets for this but I see a lot of breakages when
grouping fields into fieldsets. Labels in particular tend to be oddly
spaced and SELECT's often wrap to a different line to their label.
On Oct 16, 9:35 pm, "Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu,
Apologies. Meant to post that to Django-Users (although I've probably
got a better chance of a useful answer here I am aware that it's not
really the right question for this group).
However now it's here - any tips gratefully received!
On Oct 2, 2:22 pm, andybak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
Hi there,
I'm looking to figure out how to subclass the widget for the FileField
in newforms-admin so that it displays the current filename next to the
upload field.
Does anyone know there are any examples/resources to help me get
started? I assume I need to subclass forms.widgets.Widget and
Hi,
As far as I can tell newforms-admin has been broken for the last week.
Add and change pages are broken for most objects (I think any with a
foreign key) and the error given is something like:
TypeError at /admin/cms/keyword/add/
instancemethod expected at least 2 arguments, got 0
It appears
It sounds related to this:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/tree/browse_frm/thread/76e8b700b30b85ff/44359701d3b9be4c?rnum=1&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fdjango-developers%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F76e8b700b30b85ff%3F#doc_5d6b304972a7cd5b
I think Joseph is looking into it. The current SVN
>From my experience and a post on Django-users I think this has also
broken the newforms-admin change and add pages.
On Sep 15, 9:46 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-15 at 16:17 +0800, 张沈鹏(电子科大08年本科应届) wrote:
> > I tried to open a ticket , but the Trac detected
I think that must be Yuri's own work actually. Yuri?
On Sep 12, 1:42 pm, RKnobelspies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You might also want to check out this snippet:
>
> RowLevelPermissionsAdminhttp://www.djangosnippets.org/snippets/414/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You
Off list Yuri pointed me to a patch that by the look of it does
exactly what I need:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3987
Thanks Yuri!
On 11 Sep, 16:02, "Yuri Baburov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/9/11, andybak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Am I
Am I right in thinking that the current recommended approach to
restricting admin access to certain objects (or rows) on a user by
user basis is to use the admin hooks in newforms-admin? I've started
using the queryset hook to remove items from the changelist page.
However I am wondering how the
Hopefully this is a suitable post for dev as I'm trying to work out if
it's a bug worth filing or not. Apologies if it turns out to be user
error...
I'm switching between trunk and newforms-admin using a .pth file.
In trunk when I login as superuser and 'add user' through admin I
taken to
26 matches
Mail list logo