Re: An improved settings.py configuration (revisited)

Russ & Carl: Thanks for the course correction. I guess one tends to read what one wants to see, rather than what the writer wrote. Yes, this would make a good package, and I can do some different things with it that way. For example, I really want to type: >dj -s test_vernon rather than:

Re: An improved settings.py configuration (revisited)

On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Carl Meyer wrote: > Hi Vernon, > > On 03/07/2014 07:44 PM, VernonCole wrote: > > Several months ago, I floated an idea on this forum for re-structuring > > the settings.py environment. > > > > It generated a fair amount of discussion. The

Re: An improved settings.py configuration (revisited)

Hi Vernon, On 03/07/2014 07:44 PM, VernonCole wrote: > Several months ago, I floated an idea on this forum for re-structuring > the settings.py environment. > > It generated a fair amount of discussion. The consensus was that > something really ought to be done, but no one was sure just what.

An improved settings.py configuration (revisited)

Several months ago, I floated an idea on this forum for re-structuring the settings.py environment. It generated a fair amount of discussion. The consensus was that something really ought to be done, but no one was sure just what. One strong opinion was that any new changes must involve a