On Sat, 2008-09-27 at 15:08 -0700, Justin Bronn wrote:
> > Am I missing where this is discussed, or is it an oversight, or is there
> > a reason not to mention it? I'll patch the docs if you'd like...
>
> Ned,
>
> Malcolm documented this behavior after qs-rf merged. However, this
> section
On Sat, 2008-09-27 at 18:57 -0700, Leaf wrote:
[...]
> I'm still a bit confused about the dev process, though - if the code's
> already there, and it won't introduce anything backwards-incompatible,
> why don't they merge it into the trunk? It seems to me that it would
> make development and
On Sep 27, 9:06 pm, Julien Phalip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You might want to take a look at ticket #1105. I addresses the issue
> you're raising here, and has been put on the version 1.1 wish-list.
On second thought, I do think that the diff file attached to 1105 does
a better job of this
On Sep 28, 4:20 am, Leaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Out of necessity, I've made a modification to my Django trunk. It
> gives a parameter to the Library.simple_tag() function named
> takes_context.
You might want to take a look at ticket #1105. I addresses the issue
you're raising here, and
> Am I missing where this is discussed, or is it an oversight, or is there
> a reason not to mention it? I'll patch the docs if you'd like...
Ned,
Malcolm documented this behavior after qs-rf merged. However, this
section may have slipped through the cracks with the documentation
refactor.
Out of necessity, I've made a modification to my Django trunk. It
gives a parameter to the Library.simple_tag() function named
takes_context. This works like the takes_context on
Library.inclusion_tag() - it gives the tag the context. So far, I've
done manual tests on it for:
+ Accepting the
The behavior of pickling QuerySets changed in qsrf, and therefore in
Django 1.0: previously the pickle included only the query, now it
includes the results. This was the root cause of a bad problem that
took us three days to find:
Joseph Kocherhans wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 6:27 AM, Ivan Sagalaev
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ## Proposal
>>
>> To fix this I was thinking along the lines of:
>>
>> class ArticleForm(ModelForm):
>> class Meta:
>> model = Article
>> fields =
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Túlio Paiva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello!
Hi
> Before I wrote this e-mail, I look at the tickets but I haven't found
> none with this approach.
Cause this functionality has been available for long time without any patches.
You should have looked into docs.
