hat is probably
stored in another concrete field
Thank you for your attention.
Best regards
Federico Capoano
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop rec
Note that this is just a shot in the dark. I didn't try it out myself.
>
> /Markus
>
> On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 7:53:04 PM UTC+2, Federico Capoano wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> some time ago I submitted this ticket:
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/t
Great idea.
The questions look good enough to me.
I love django-apps or libraries shipped in python packages. One of the
reason I love Django is the fact that it didn't frenetically add stuff to
the framework just because it's cool.
The good thing of python packages is that you can get some
Wednesday, April 22, 2015 at 9:54:39 AM UTC+2, Federico Capoano wrote:
>
> Hi Markus,
>
> thank you very much for your suggestion. I'll try it later this afternoon
> and come back to report.
>
> Federico
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
I think the correct syntax is:
cls._meta.add_virtual_field(self)
The problem is that if I use this syntax it seems that the admin ignores
these fields, what happens is that the changes I make to the virtual fields
are ignored.
These are the test results related to the VirtualField
Yes I am on 1.7 because 1.8 is not supported yet but I'm working on it.
I'll come back when I'll have more info.
Federico
On Thursday, April 23, 2015 at 8:09:42 PM UTC+2, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, April 23, 2015 at 6:59:58 PM UTC+2, Federico Capoano wrot
Hey Emil,
On Sunday, May 31, 2015 at 10:52:26 AM UTC+2, Emil Stenström wrote:
...
> Also, I don't think you would need to mix redis (or any other persistent
> storage) into this. The connected clients could simply be stored in an
> in-memory array, that is discarded if the server crashes.
Hi Andrew,
i have been taking a look at your work because I find it interesting and I
also think that django should have some core mechanism for integrating
websockets.
I was wondering, have you also tried one of the other popular django
websocket apps? Have you found any interesting one that
not the only one who would like to have flexible/dynamic models
:-)
Federico
On Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 11:48:25 AM UTC+2, Federico Capoano wrote:
>
> Yes I am on 1.7 because 1.8 is not supported yet but I'm working on it.
>
> I'll come back when I'll have more info.
I just ran into this ticket:
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24306
I found myself in a situation where it would be really useful.
Two questions:
- has anybody verified that UNLOGGED tables really perform faster when
running tests with Postgres?
- is this feature on the TODO list
.
The best thing would be to have a subsection called "How to speed up tests
with Postgres" or something similar.
What do you think?
Federico
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 5:54:08 PM UTC+2, Aymeric Augustin wrote:
>
> Hello Federico,
>
> 2015-07-13 16:26 GMT+02:00 Fede
+1
I am assuming the deprecation is done according to the process that was
discussed in the thread "An easier path to upgrade from one LTS release to
another".
On Sunday, July 12, 2015 at 4:53:23 PM UTC+2, James Bennett wrote:
>
> There's not much to this, really, except what's in the subject
/docs/current/static/non-durability.html
And then some text with "if you want to run your tests on postgresql please
see the docs around non durable postgres"
2015-07-13 18:46 GMT+02:00 Federico Capoano <federico.capo...@gmail.com>:
> Sure, i've just done something similar for thi
That's quite baffling.
On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 7:03:03 PM UTC+2, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> I see a thirty second increase in the test suite (from 7.5 minutes to 8
> minutes) on my local machine with:
>
> sql_create_table = "CREATE UNLOGGED TABLE %(table)s (%(definition)s)"
>
--
You received
I would definitely second this.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 3:17:30 PM UTC+2, Baptiste Mispelon wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> After starting a new project recently and failing three times to type
> the name of the postgres backend correctly, I was wondering if there's
> really any value in
Hey Christophe,
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
[CUT]
>
> By the way, I would strongly advise *against* *ever* even mentioning fsync =
> off anywhere in the Django documentation; that is such a horribly bad idea in
> 99.95% of real-life situations
;> development. They are just as likely to find similar instructions on the
>>>> internet, but without warnings, and having it in our docs with the warning
>>>> will be helpful.
>>>>
>>>> Having a fast test suite is such an important part of
Errata, PR link is https://github.com/django/django/pull/5021 - sorry
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Federico Capoano
<federico.capo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for all the feedback.
>
> I opened this PR with the proposed addition to the docs:
> https://github.com/dja
I just changed the URL in the to
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/non-durability.html as
suggested.
Federico
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
Hi everybody,
I am sure it has happened to many of you.
Validating m2m BEFORE saving the relationships is very hard and time
consuming.
Now this solution:
http://schinckel.net/2012/02/06/pre-validating-many-to-many-fields./
Proposes to solve it with a ModelForm in the admin.
Cool, that works.
ns, please post your code and ask for help on
> django-users.
>
> --
> Aymeric
>
> 2015-12-03 13:28 GMT+01:00 Federico Capoano <federico...@gmail.com
> >:
>
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> I am sure it has happened to many of you.
>>
>> Validating
ticket about adding model level validation for
> many-to-many: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12938
>
> On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 11:04:22 AM UTC-5, Federico Capoano wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Aymeric,
>>
>> I decided to post this problem on django-devel
It seems like a good proposal, It would be good to know why Sergei doesn't
think it is appropiate for Django to add links to third party package
comparison grids.
django-rest-framework links to third party extensions in its documentation
and this had a positive effect on the whole DRF
Hi all,
I came across the need of modifying the submit row functionality in the
django admin and I found out a small issue which prevents me from modifying
the template without rewriting (duplicating) also the templatetag entirely.
If you take a look at the code of submit_row templatetag
jangoproject.com/ticket/13875
>
> Feel free to update and/or improve the patch, add tests, and send a pull
> request. Thanks!
>
>
> On Monday, February 1, 2016 at 6:18:35 AM UTC-5, Federico Capoano wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I came across the need of modifying the
provement in that sense but that shouldn't be difficult. The main blocker
> to getting it merged looks like "Needs tests."
>
> On Tuesday, February 2, 2016 at 10:58:40 AM UTC-5, Federico Capoano wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> thank you for letting me know of the open
Great work!
On Saturday, February 6, 2016 at 4:27:42 PM UTC+1, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Triaged
>
> ---
>
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/26162 - Data loss when
> ManyToManyField refers to the wrong table (accepted)
>
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/26168 - BooleanField is
This never happened to me and I find it very strange. Maybe it's a bug or
maybe it's the intended behaviour, but I find it REALLY strange.
Consider a widget which, for some reason, raises an exception:
class CoolWidget(AdminTextareaWidget):
def render(self, name, value, attrs={}):
k it's {% include %} rendering an empty string if there's an
> exception. In Django 1.9, we added a logger for these exceptions to make
> debugging easier:
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/stable/topics/logging/#django-template.
>
> On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 6:30:35 AM UTC-5, F
That's a great news, let us know if we can help with more feedback.
Federico
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 9:20 AM Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2017, at 20:31, Tim Allen wrote:
>
> Your point on design by committee is spot-on;
Looks like a great improvement for newcomers! I hope to see this included to
Django.
Federico
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
Hi everyone,
I have a raw_id_field in the admin and I need to trigger some javascript
logic when it's value is filled by the user through the popup, but
unfortunately I found out that when the popup is closed and the value is
filled into the field the change event is not fired.
I found this
While writing tests for the admin, I'm clashing with this error message:
"ManagementForm data is missing or has been tampered with".
It's not the first time I do this, but every time the process has been
extremely painful because the error message doesn't point out the exact
problem.
This time
I would ask: what are the pros and cons of dropping support for python 3.5?
I think allowing users to easily use and install django based applications
is more important than strictly follow a python version support policy.
I think that if we drop support for python 3.5, which is the default
Hi everyone,
It's been great to read some good insights on this discussion.
How to attract new contributors from a different demographic (geographic
area and age)? Good question.
I wanted to share with you my experience as (second year) organization
administrator and mentor for OpenWISP
o.apps.AppConfig.label
>
> On Friday, December 18, 2020 at 10:47:45 AM UTC-5 Federico Capoano wrote:
>
>> Defining the app_label of an AppConfig with a dot, like
>> "myproject.subapp" is allowed, but raises an exception in the migration
>> fram
ere! User-facing
> runtime exceptions like unpacking errors are never good.
>
> This should be quite a simple change to make, I’d suggest opening a trac
> ticket first and we can go from there.
>
> Tom
>
> On 18 Dec 2020, at 16:38, Federico Capoano
> wrote:
>
>
>
Defining the app_label of an AppConfig with a dot, like "myproject.subapp"
is allowed, but raises an exception in the migration framework (too many
values to unpack).
Did anybody notice this?
Is it supposed to be allowed or not at all?
Best regards
Federico Capoano
--
Yo
I have a celery task which performs queries and network operations.
When deployed with celery with gevent concurrency, I occasionally (but not
always) get reports of SynchronousOnlyOperation exceptions being raised.
I described the problem in detail on StackOverflow: SynchronousOnlyOperation
o
raise this here so we may fix it at the root instead.
Best regards
Federico Capoano
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails fro
:27 PM UTC-3 Federico Capoano wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> yes I can add EMAIL_TIMEOUT in my applications and I am already doing that.
>
> The reason I wanted to bring this up here is that I care about Django.
> This behavior goes against a well known concept of the Unix Philosoph
of spending
hours to debug it like I did in the past week.
Alternatively, we could set a default timeout only if
"socket.getdefaulttimeout()" returns None, just to avoid applications
stalling indefinitely, which is something that has been happening to me
lately.
Best regards
Federico Capoan
Hi there,
yes I can add EMAIL_TIMEOUT in my applications and I am already doing that.
The reason I wanted to bring this up here is that I care about Django.
This behavior goes against a well known concept of the Unix Philosophy
which is to "Write programs which fail in a way that is easy to
43 matches
Mail list logo