Re: structural & functional review of django documentation

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 4:52:36 PM UTC-8, Daniele Procida wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015, Samuel Bishop > wrote: > The main existing sections are: > > * tutorials (/intro) > > Tutorials take the new user by the hand through a series of steps. The > important

Re: structural & functional review of django documentation

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015, Samuel Bishop wrote: >I think the general concept would be covered by either creating a "fourth >division". So we would go from "topics", "reference", and "how-to", to >"topics", "reference", "how-to", and "implementation"/"internals"/"APIs"/etc >Or

Re: delegating our static file serving

I'd like to work together with Dave to develop a proof of concept that integrates whitenoise into Django. I spent about an hour looking through whitenoise and our own static file serving code, and I think integrating whitenoise will yield a simpler user experience with about the same amount of

Re: Help needed with the MySQL max index length problem for Django 1.10

Ugh, I guess I'm in favor of max_length=191. It'll just be awkward to explain that one in the docs. On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 3:27:23 PM UTC-5, Collin Anderson wrote: > > Hi All, > > I finally looked at this more today. I started working on the INDEX > (col1(191)) solution from #18392,

Re: Help needed with the MySQL max index length problem for Django 1.10

Hi All, I finally looked at this more today. I started working on the INDEX (col1(191)) solution from #18392, but unfortunately I don't think we can use that solution in this case because it's a UNIQUE index. (I still think it's best solution for non-unique indexes.) I think these are our

Re: structural & functional review of django documentation

There are some automatically added "[source]" links (see [1] for an example), however, other links don't work (e.g. [2]) because we use the convenience import path in the documentation. It would be a good task to see if this could be fixed in Sphinx. There is some room to add some "contributor

Re: structural & functional review of django documentation

Broadly speaking, I think the 'optimal' goal is not going to be one that changes our existing documentation structure in any disruptive way. I think the general concept would be covered by either creating a "fourth division". So we would go from "topics", "reference", and "how-to", to

URL dispatching framework: feedback requested

Hi everyone, This past week I've made some great progress in rewriting the URL dispatcher framework and iterating on my implementation. A big part of my effort to refactor my original code was to increase the performance of reverse() to a level similar to the legacy dispatcher, and to decouple

Re: structural & functional review of django documentation

On 27 déc. 2015, at 23:42, Tim Graham wrote: > In my view, Django's docs haven't strayed from the "topics", "reference", and > "how-to" division that we've had since 1.0 or so. I’ve been around for some time and, to be honest, I still have a hard time using this

Re: structural & functional review of django documentation

HI Doug, I can relate to what you are saying, I had a similar experience when trying to find a reference for the generic FormView. Issuing a P.R. to improve it is on my BLOTTD (big list of things to do). I was interviewing a candidate last week who knows I'm a big fan of Django, and wanted to