Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

Hello, Il 10/02/2016 00:25, Tim Graham ha scritto: The introduction to the admin in the docs [0] reads: "One of the most powerful parts of Django is the automatic admin interface. It reads metadata in your model to provide a powerful and production-ready interface that content

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 at 23:25 Tim Graham wrote: > The introduction to the admin in the docs [0] reads: > > "One of the most powerful parts of Django is the automatic admin >> interface. It reads metadata in your model to provide a powerful and >> production-ready interface

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

I can't help but feel that the "admin is very rudimentary and hard to customize" is perpetually overplayed by many in the community. Maybe I'm suffering Stockholm Syndrome but I'd like to raise a dissenting voice. I find it the quickest and most efficient way to provide an admin interface for

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

Just to follow up - I think the biggest improvements I've yearned for are fairly simple and unlikely to break backwards compatibility: 1. Break up the remaining monolithic methods to allow easier overriding (this is much better nowadays but a few beasts remain) 2. More blocks in the templates

Re: Lazy operations refactor regression with abstract models #25858

On Tuesday 09 February 2016 23:33:50 charettes wrote: > Hi everyone, > > The chosen fix[1] unfortunately introduced a new regression[2]. > > It looks like the behavior described in the previous ticket was possible > with > Django 1.8 under certain circumstances[3] where the abstract models

Re: Lazy operations refactor regression with abstract models #25858

I should have mentioned that this behavior is reproducible since at least Django 1.6 and has not been introduced by Django 1.8. I wouldn't be surprised if it has always been working before the fix was introduced. Still, as you mentionned the conditions required to achieve this were really

Re: remove support for unsalted password hashers?

Is salted SHA1 sufficiently insecure to remove it from the default PASSWORD_HASHERS or should we leave it for now? Any project created before pbkdf2 was introduced in Django 1.4 (March 2012) will likely have some SHA1 hashes unless all their users have logged in since. I've written

Django & django-polymorphic

Hi there, I'd love to see some (most?) of the features from django-polymorphic on django itself. I'm very much be willing to work on this myself. Of course, there's several details that need to be discussed too, HOWEVER, but before I even start, I'd like to know if they'd even be acceptable in

Re: Django & django-polymorphic

I'm not sure. Did you find this past discussion: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/tSLuqu0UFrY/discussion ? The idea was also mentioned a month ago with no replies: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/Ov91x7AXwmM/discussion Are you a maintainer of

Re: Django & django-polymorphic

On 11/02/16 09:22, 'Hugo Osvaldo Barrera' via Django developers (Contributions to Django itself) wrote: Hi there, I'd love to see some (most?) of the features from django-polymorphic on django itself. I'm very much be willing to work on this myself. Of course, there's several details that

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 at 13:55 Andy Baker wrote: > I can't help but feel that the "admin is very rudimentary and hard to > customize" is perpetually overplayed by many in the community. Maybe I'm > suffering Stockholm Syndrome but I'd like to raise a dissenting voice. > > I find

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

On 11/02/16 00:55, Andy Baker wrote: I can't help but feel that the "admin is very rudimentary and hard to customize" is perpetually overplayed by many in the community. Maybe I'm suffering Stockholm Syndrome but I'd like to raise a dissenting voice. I must admit I'm a large proponent of

Re: Lazy operations refactor regression with abstract models #25858

It looks like we agree that this depending on import order is not on, so we have no choice but to break behaviour in some cases. Option 1 (don't allow relative references) removes support for relative references in abstract models for everyone. Option 2 (resolve references relative to the

Re: Django & django-polymorphic

Hi all, On Wed, Feb 10, 2016, at 19:38, Tim Graham wrote: > I'm not sure. Did you find this past discussion: > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/tSLuqu0UFrY/discussion > ? The idea was also mentioned a month ago with no replies: >

Re: Django & django-polymorphic

On 11/02/16 15:05, 'Hugo Osvaldo Barrera' via Django developers (Contributions to Django itself) wrote: > There was some research by Sebastian Vetter on "single-child > auto-resolve" solutions for MTI and how they scaled (from memory, > model-utils' InheritanceManager, polymorphic, and