Hello Django Devs,
this is just a quick note to let you know that there will be a
translation sprint in Montréal on 2010-02-15. This is our second
sprint and we hope to push it further with a series of sprint until we
reach complete translation of the documentation.
More infos on our website:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:35 AM, tezro wrote:
> Hi everybody.
>
> I use Django for about a year, do websites for about 5 years, am kind
> of experienced in web, interface and techdesign, used lots of CMS or
> other site management tools (99% is a piece of crab). And I'm writing
> here because altho
Hi everybody.
I use Django for about a year, do websites for about 5 years, am kind
of experienced in web, interface and techdesign, used lots of CMS or
other site management tools (99% is a piece of crab). And I'm writing
here because although Django admin default look is successive, I think
it h
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:11 AM, kmpm wrote:
> Hmm... strange.
> I get a strange error when I tried to do this
> Something about a django_content_type relation which I don't have.
> This probably happens when the "app" gets registerd in the auth
> system.
> Same error with both postgresql and
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:00 AM, scastillo wrote:
> And what if i just want to have the same database but with different
> users for each app on project?
If, by "users" are you referring to the database login credentials,
you could set up a multiple connections to the same database, each
with a di
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 5:22 AM, Richard Davies
wrote:
> On Feb 2, 9:19 pm, James Bennett wrote:
>> Also, note that this will be the final feature freeze for 1.2;
>> if it ain't in trunk when I roll the tarball, it'll have to wait until 1.3.
>
> Any chance of getting #10476 and #11156 in?
>
> Both
On Wednesday 03 February 2010 20:21:49 kanu wrote:
> My Ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12760 Titled :
> "related models with Foreignkey.null=True must not get deleted on
> delete of their relation" was marked as dublicate today.
>
> I don't aggree that this is a dublicate. i filed
Is starting the deprecation process for something a feature or a bug? If
feature, we should start the process for the psycopg1 backend (discussed
here:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/ac7874cac8ece97)
before Thursday. Near as I can tell it hasn't been marked pe
On Feb 2, 9:19 pm, James Bennett wrote:
> Also, note that this will be the final feature freeze for 1.2;
> if it ain't in trunk when I roll the tarball, it'll have to wait until 1.3.
Any chance of getting #10476 and #11156 in?
Both minor features, but both on the Version1.2Feature wiki page
(und
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:21 PM, kanu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My Ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12760 Titled : "related
> models with Foreignkey.null=True must not get deleted on delete of
> their relation" was marked as dublicate today.
>
> I don't aggree that this is a dublicate. i filed t
Hi,
My Ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12760 Titled : "related
models with Foreignkey.null=True must not get deleted on delete of
their relation" was marked as dublicate today.
I don't aggree that this is a dublicate. i filed this as a bug not a
feature request.
I am also relating to
- Original Message
> From: Guido van Rossum
> To: Jesse Noller
> Cc: Vinay Sajip ; python-...@python.org
> >> Assuming PEP 391 gets the nod, then after implementing the changes into
> Python, I plan to work with the Django community to get improved logging
> support
> in Django for 1
And what if i just want to have the same database but with different
users for each app on project?
On Jan 19, 10:35 am, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Tobias McNulty
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Bill Hubauer wrote:
>
> >> One of the use case
Hmm... strange.
I get a strange error when I tried to do this
Something about a django_content_type relation which I don't have.
This probably happens when the "app" gets registerd in the auth
system.
Same error with both postgresql and sqlite3.
Databases are configured like this..
DATABASES
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:53 AM, kmpm wrote:
> Wouldn't a database router like this sort of do the thing for now...
Yes - this is exactly what a router is designed for.
At the time I posted my last reply, routers didn't exist yet. I had to
implement routers in order to solve some other problems,
15 matches
Mail list logo
