Re: Tests of contrib apps

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > Hello, > > Currently there are three locations for the tests of contrib apps: > - under tests/ — eg. admin > - inside the app — eg. auth > - both — eg. contenttypes > > Following the modeltests /

Re: Changes to django's settings module

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Omer Katz wrote: > Why would you call them magic? > Why does allowing extensibility for those who need it is a bad idea? > You will be doing it explicitly anyway by providing a SettingsCollector > class to the Settings class' constructor. >

Re: Changes to django's settings module

On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Alex Ogier wrote: > I find the value of separate settings modules is not splitting them by > topic, but overriding them in specific contexts, like staging, production > and development. Your implementation (and, I think, any solution that >

Re: Permissions model limiting the length of verbose-name

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Shai Berger wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to draw your attention to bug #8162[1]. It is old as sin, and > annoying as virtue. > You won't get any argument from me on this analysis. > The gist of it is: because, for all models, when the

Re: Django sanctioned extensions

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:23 AM, <r...@ryanhiebert.com> wrote: > from thread "Moving database backends out of the core" > > On Mar 7, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> > wrote: > > > There is, however, a possible middle g

Re: Moving database backends out of the core

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Alex Ogier wrote: > Here's something I've been thinking about: > > As a rule, assuming that backends are not bug-riddled and do not have > needlessly shoddy performance, nearly all of the value of an ORM is in the > set of frontend features

Re: Proposal: deprecate and remove django.contrib.comments

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > Hi folks -- > > This one's simple: I'd like to deprecate `django.contrib.comments`, > scheduling it to be removed in a couple of releases. > > My rationale is this: if you don't really care much about how comments >

Re: About GSoC 2013

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Mayur Patil wrote: > Hello, > >Most of the organizations(Eclipse,Fedora, > >VLC etc) have created their GSoC Idea page. > >Where is Idea page for Django? > >I am eagerly waiting for it !! > Hi Mayur, The period for

Re: New additions to django.contrib?

On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Per-Olof Åstrand wrote: > First, I would like to give all my compliments to the persons that made > Django what it is. Although my background is in scientific computing since > 25 years back (using python, numpy, scipy, among other things),

Re: Django 1.4.3 Error Login

On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Ana Molf wrote: > This function work under dev server but not ander prod > Technical server contact said me that there are a problem because at SSH > > Hi Ana, You've posted this message to django-developers -- the mailing list for people

Re: DjangoCon Europe tickets on sale today!

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 4:52 AM, Reinout van Rees wrote: > On 27-02-13 21:21, Andre Terra wrote: > >> I wonder if these will ever be made available online for a fee, even if >> months after the conference. For a hobbyist developer like me, coughing >> up a few thousand

Re: deprecation of AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Alper Çuğun wrote: > > I looked into this today with 1.5 hitting and working on a project and > this seemed relevant. > > On Monday, 2 May 2011 19:22:53 UTC+2, Carl Meyer wrote: > >> 1. A specification of the minimal useful interface for a User

Re: contrib.auth.forms need to rewrite UserCreationForm for custom users

Hi Luan, Thanks for the suggestion, but the change you've described won't work, for two reasons. Firstly, the call to get_user_model() will be parsed when the forms module is loaded (because it's part of the Meta declaration). However, module load order can't be guaranteed, so there will be ways

Re: Replacing get_absolute_url, I am against it

On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Would anyone know if there is still any momentum behind this? I like > Adamcik's approach. > > Hi Daniel, I think if you polled the core team you'd probably still get agreement that the problem exists; however, you'd

Re: no of forms in formset

On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 1:51 AM, ANKIT BAGARIA wrote: > this is an example from formset documentation: > > the above command displays 3 forms in total 1 with initial data and 2 blanks. > AFTER GOING THROUGH formset.py file I AM NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW IS 3 > FORMS

Re: select_for_update running on db_for_read

Hi Ioan, I'd need to dig into the code to be 100% certain, but what you've described seems plausible, and the fix looks like it's going in the right direction. A ticket is certainly called for. As for the patch -- it needs tests :-) Django's test suite has support for testing multiple-database

Re: clarification of API backwards-compatibility policy

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Carl Meyer wrote: > Hi, > > I was just about to tell someone on IRC that Django's > backwards-compatibility policy only applies to documented methods and > attributes (which is how I'd always understood it), but when I actually > went to look at

Re: managements.commands and namespace packages

Hi Alessandro, On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Alessandro Dentella wrote: > Hi, > > this email aims at finding a bettere solution to a problem that was already > posted some months ago in the user list [1]. If you use namespaces in > packages to split your code in

Re: please help

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:47 AM, ABHINAV MISRA wrote: > Sir I am going through the book "Django 1.0 Web Site Development" as > suggested. But i need to ask how can i contribute to django. I thought that > proposal needs to be submitted during gsoc so I thought to

Re: Next steps for ticket #18150

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Steven Vargas wrote: > Hi, I'm a student and this is my first contribution to an open source > project so I am trying to learn along the way. > > Anyways, I submitted a patch for > #18150and I

Re: Python/Django developer job opportunity

Please don't post job advertisements to django-developers. Django-dev is a list for discussing the development of Django itself. If you want to post job advertisements, you're welcome to do so on Django-users. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 4:27 AM, wrote:

Re: please help

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:39 PM, nimesh ghelani wrote: > Hi, > I am also interested in Django as organization for GSoC. I did few basic > projects using Django and now as a final test, i am putting my all in for > my hardcode 13 submission. After that, i believe i will

Re: please help

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:17 PM, ABHINAV MISRA wrote: > I am Abhinav Misra, an undergraduate. > I was going through the project ideas of GSoC 2012 so as to find any > project of which I am capable of. > There i came up with the project named: " improved error reporting

Re: A New Django Release Cycle

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Carlos Ribeiro wrote: > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Aymeric Augustin < > aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > >> There isn't any corporate backing behind Django and no one gets paid to >> make releases happens. Besides, active

Re: A New Django Release Cycle

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Abdullah Esmail wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am a web/mobile developer and I have been mainly using django since 2008 > for web apps. > I'll throw my suggestion out there and see how you guys react to it. > > I think the current

Re: Shouldn't Textarea be CamelCased as TextArea?

Yes, it's a wart from HTML. Even if we were inclined to alter the name to make it idiomatic Python (which isn't necessarily a good idea in this case -- the HTML naming convention makes sense), it would be impractical to change it at this point in Django's lifecycle - there is so much code

Re: postgresql range types v2

On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Marco Paolini wrote: > Hi all, > > sorry for the noise, forget my previous mail as it was pointing to the > wrong commit, > here's the good one: > > https://github.com/mpaolini/**django/commit/** >

Re: make the source code of the django tutorial available ?

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Daniel Greenfeld <pyda...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 4:43:14 PM UTC-8, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > >> Hi Daniele, >> >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Daniele Procida >> <evi...@goog

Re: make the source code of the django tutorial available ?

Hi Daniele, On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Daniele Procida wrote: > I'm re-opening an old discussion - > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/MbLD1BL5xkQ/discussion. > Sorry if it all comes out weird, I'm having to do it in Google Groups. > > I propose

Re: serializers.serialize on a single object

Sure - sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me. Feel free to open a ticket and provide a patch! Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Gabriel Warshauer-Baker wrote: > As Luke Plant pointed out a few years ago, you *can* just do: > > def

Re: runserver stdout and stderr piping problems

I'm not aware of a ticket for this issue, and I couldn't find one from a quick search, so feel free to open one. The approach described by the OP seems reasonable, so if you want to provide a patch as well, feel free. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Chris Proto

Re: Minor feature: Make TestCase pass the testcase instance to self.client's constructor

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Malcolm Box wrote: > Hi, > > When creating self.client in TestCase, it would be very useful if the > testcase instance was passed to the client. > > I'm using a replacement client class that does various validation checks, > so wants to use

Re: Adding configuration to View to dispatch to any methods.

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 2:46 AM, Hiroki Kiyohara wrote: > Hi, Russ. > > Thanks for your reply.That makes sense.I notice that the configuration of > my suggestion is complex. > We need to know what the configuration to take the value.It is necessary > to re-consider the

Re: Adding configuration to View to dispatch to any methods.

Hi Hiroki, Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm afraid I don't see the benefit of doing this as configuration, rather than something in the dispatched method itself. Using your gist as an example -- why should this be something defined in a custom dispatching configuration format, rather than

Re: Request for proposals: Django project at Cascade Bicycle Club

Hi Mary, The Django-Developers mailing list is for managing the development of Django itself. If you have a job offer/RFP that you want to fill, you should be mailing the Django *Users* mailing list. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 7:01 AM, wrote: >

Re: Proposal: use SQLAlchemy Core for query generation

On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Donald Stufft <donald.stu...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Wednesday, December 26, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > Why? Because we've gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure this sort of > thing is at least theoretically possible. &

Re: Proposal: use SQLAlchemy Core for query generation

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: > On Sunday, December 23, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Florent Gallaire wrote: > > Django ORM should work for SQL and NoSQL DBMS. > NoSQL integration in Django is a more interesting and needed subject, > but who cares about that

Re: First request - Modify django.core.management.color with settings option

Agreed - a --color command line flag makes more sense to me, and a lot more sense than a setting. I *might* be able to be convinced about an environment variable too (since the environment variable DJANGO_COLORS is already used to set the palette), but frankly, Alex Gaynor's argument about this

Re: e-mail changed to email in email validator

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Skylar Saveland wrote: > I checked out 1.5 branch today and found a change that I can't find the > debate/announcement for: e-mail to email in > > django/core/validators.py:validate_email = EmailValidator(email_re, > _('Enter a valid

Re: Is Django documentation translations to land in main repository ?

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Amirouche B. wrote: > Héllo, > > Everything is in the title. Does Django core dev's want to have localized > documentation in main repository or should it be managed by local DUG ? > Yes :-) In a perfect world, you'd be able to

Re: Django Admin Revamp - Any updates?

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Travis Swicegood wrote: > Is there a wiki page on the admin and changes that are planned for it? > This comes up every few months with a "hey, I've done X with the admin, > can we just use it to replace/update contrib.admin?" Would be nice

Re: #19076 - TemplateView does not support setting mime type

Hi Gavin, Unfortunately, the deadline for new features in Django 1.5 has passed; once we release a beta, we only accept bug fixes. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Gavin Wahl wrote: > I know this is last minute, but is there any chance of getting

Re: Proposal: Django Admin Site and "pretty" app name

? I can't seem to find it. > > On Friday, December 7, 2012 10:41:16 PM UTC-3, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > >> >> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Pedro J. Aramburu >> <para...@tres42.com.ar>wrote: >> >>> Ramiro, I've read the ticket but it seems stu

Re: Proposal: Django Admin Site and "pretty" app name

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Pedro J. Aramburu wrote: > Ramiro, I've read the ticket but it seems stuck. I just want it to go > forward because I think it's a major UI/UX issue for non-programmers the > lack of "pretty" app names. But I want it to be done right with a

Re: Provide a way to lookup valid dict items

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Ryan Stuart wrote: > Hi All, > > I recently discovered that there is no way in the Django template syntax > to access all valid items of a dict. For example, as I understand it, it is > impossible to access the only item of this dict: > >

Re: I'd like to make a contribution to the wiki

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Harry Percival wrote: > Hi Russell, thanks for getting back to us. Here's our info: > > Hi Harry, I've just posted those updates, and done the cleanups you suggested. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are

Re: Blocker for 1.5 - representation of filesystem paths in Django

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Aymeric Augustin < aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > Hello, > > Django 1.5 beta 1 contains a regression for users who install Django or > their projects under non-ASCII paths: > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/19357 Unfortunately, the patch > isn't

Re: Thank you to our security aware developers

Hi Chris, Thanks for the kind words. It's always nice to know when your efforts are appreciated. As for the suggestion about the error message -- that's sounds like a reasonable idea to me; feel free to open a ticket. If you're looking to get involved in the development of Django itself, this

Re: I'd like to make a contribution to the wiki

Hi Harry, That particular page has been locked down due to problems we've had with spam. If you let us know what you want to add, I can add an entry to the list on your behalf. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Harry Percival wrote: > It's for

Re: Improved ajax support idea

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:10 AM, James Pic wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Thank you for your feedback. And pretty soon I will tackle this problem in > an external app - or consider joining the party if somebody else has > started, in this case feel free to let me know. > > I

Re: Confusion with Unicode

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Santiago Basulto < santiago.basu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey guys, i'm posting this here because I posted this on django-users > yesterday and didn't get any help. > > I realise someone has now answered your question -- but *please* don't use django-developers as

Re: dumpdata with custom auth model

Hi Benoit, Like I said in my last response, I'm *not* seeing the problem. Saying "I'm seeing the problem" doesn't help me. Saying "I've got a custom User" doesn't help me either -- I've got a custom User (several, actually - a test case extending AbstractUser and one extending AbstractBaseUser,

Re: Improved ajax support idea

I use a lot of AJAX in my projects as well. However, it that doesn't mean that *Django* needs to include advanced AJAX support. I (and other members of the core team) have said this many times in the past -- the Django community benefits when Django isn't a monolithic core. >From a technical

Re: Custom user models in 1.5, not flexible/dry enough?

On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Val Neekman wrote: > OK, I went back and looked at Django 1.5 again. (New Custom User Model) > > Here is what I think: (User Django 1.4 as base) > > 1. Rename username to userid and increase the length to 255 chars while > keeping the rest of

Re: Class based views: A standard hook for http-method-independent code

ood reason for it, it just feels bad every > time I do it. The only way to work around this is to override dispatch > without calling the original, and essentially duplicate the original > dispatch method with an init call added in. > > Cheers, > Jordan > > On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 6:25

Re: Class based views: A standard hook for http-method-independent code

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Aaron Merriam wrote: > Without setting request, args, and kwargs on on the view instance (which > is done during the base dispatch view), anything in the view that assumes > these values are present cannot run. > > Most of my views end up

Re: DatabaseError with empty IN clause with Paginator

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Chi Ho Kwok wrote: > Hi devs, > > I've noticed that after upgrading to Django 1.4, __in queries really don't > like empty sets. Simple queries still work, like > User.objects.filter(groups__in=[]), but most failures I've seen are with >

Re: Class based views: A standard hook for http-method-independent code

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Diederik van der Boor wrote: > > Op 7 nov. 2012, om 17:49 heeft Aaron Merriam het volgende geschreven: > > I wanted to post and modified version of a gist posted earlier in this > thread. > > https://gist.github.com/4032482 > > I originally

Re: Custom user models in 1.5, not flexible/dry enough?

Ok - so, I've been following this thread, and I should probably shed some light on the other side of the decision making process. I've got a history with Mixins. I was responsible for the final commit of Django's class-based views, which are very mixin heavy… and haven't been universally well

Re: Custom user models don't like non integer primary keys.

Hi Eric, Although the full stack trace would confirm it, I think I can guess what the problem is here -- it's the mechanism for generating reset tokens. If you dig into the token generation (and reversal) mechanisms, they use int_to_base36 and base36_to_int to convert the user's primary key into

Re: Custom user models in 1.5, not flexible/dry enough?

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:59 AM, ionel wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to make a custom user model so I can login and register > with the email (instead of username). This means the email must become > unique and I don't need the username fields. I don't want to fill it > with

Re: Class based views: A standard hook for http-method-independent code (and a proposal for an init() method)

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Jordan Hagan wrote: > I'm sorry if I came across that way, that wasn't my intention at all. > Andre Terra who was the one to initially raise opposition has changed his > stance on the functionality since he first posted, as per his email 4 days

Re: Class based views: A standard hook for http-method-independent code (and a proposal for an init() method)

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:20 AM, Jordan Hagan wrote: > As it seems that there is no longer any real opposition to this ticket (if > there is, now would be the time to speak up) I'll go ahead and prepare a > patch against the current trunk and get it uploaded to trac and see

Re: Django template filters floatformat and intcomma: speed issues

On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Kee wrote: > Hello, > > I was generating a lagrge table with django and wondered why response is > so slow (it has ~ 2000 x 10), so I rewrote > profiled ``floatformat`` and ``intcomma`` and wrote down their > implementations using builtin

Re: Possible deprecation of depth= in select_related

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > > If anyone has any major objections to the deprecation of depth, you > should > > shout now. If there are no objections and people think

Re: Updating default errors in contrib.auth.forms.PasswordResetForm

Hi Lee, What you propose certainly sounds reasonable -- anything that reduces the exposure of valid accounts to an external source is a good thing, IMHO. Did you have an alternative wording to suggest? If you do, please open a ticket. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Lee

Re: Unicode SlugField

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Florian Apolloner wrote: > Hi, > > it surely won't change in 1.5 since we already released an alpha. > > That's incorrect -- it's still possible. Alpha is the freeze for "big" features. Little features can still be added up till the release

Re: How to test patch

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Dominic Rodger wrote: > Another long time user here (at some point I'd love to make the jump to > contributor, just need to find more time) - out of interest, is there a > reason we don't use Travis? I wonder if that might help those with

Re: How to test patch

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Jan Bednařík wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm using Django for more than four years and last week I started > contributing. > > In docs about contributing I didn't find how detailed should be my testing > while I'm writing or reviewing patch? Is

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Ludwig Kraatz wrote: > Hi Russ, > > >> >> > - The last_login field is in the AbstractBaseUser, but it isn't >> > documented as a required field. Is this field required for something? >> > Is it needed as part of AbstractBaseUser? >> >> Yes,

Re: Add a "split" field to a model causes problems

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Andrew Ingram wrote: > Hi all, > > This one stung me today. Basically as part of an event (calendar) app, I > have functionality for splitting a series of events into two at a given > timestamp. The details aren't particularly relevant, but

Re: finding the source of "interesting" SQL queries

Hi Matt, I'm not aware of any community maintained solution for this. However, interestingly, what you've suggested (including some contextual stack information in a query comment) is something that was suggested by Cal Henderson at the very first DjangoCon. I'm not sure Ned's "global request

Re: end of "coming soon" in the tutorial? - tutorial 5 feedback needed!

Hi Tim, Both of these are looking really good. I've left some comments on the tickets, mostly fairly minor suggestions. Russ %-) On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Tim Graham wrote: > Thank-you for the feedback, guys. I've updated the patch based on > suggestions, so if

Re: Update on localflavor move

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > Hi all, > > We've been talking about moving django.contrib.localflavor into > separate packages, outside of Django proper > (https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/OiyEGmXTifs/discussion). > Today I did

Re: URL dispatcher slow?

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > Why does every conversation about Django's performance met with "GTFO we > don't care"? (that was a rhetorical question :). Ok - If this is where the conversation is starting, it's going to go downhill *very* fast.

Re: localflavor for Singapore

Hi James, Thanks for the submission. Two quick points: 1) As we describe in our contributors guide, there's no need to post a message to django-dev letting us know you've opened a ticket. Trac has plenty of triggers and notifications to let people know about new tickets, including an email feed

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:14 PM, rizumu wrote: > > It is great to see this merged, it has been a long time coming. :) > > I would like to add backwards compatibility to some apps and I'm looking for > a recommended technique. Could the following, or a better option, find its >

Re: Schema Alteration update

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Russell Keith-Magee > <russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: >> Have I missed part of the discussion here? At DjangoCon, South was >> still going

Re: Schema Alteration update

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote: > So, the patch [1] is looking alright, but after some consideration I think > it's going to be best to leave this until just after the 1.5 branch has > happened and then merge it in as part of the 1.6 cycle. > > My

Re: DatabaseFeatures and supports_transactions

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:24 PM, maxi wrote: > > > El martes, 25 de septiembre de 2012 09:05:47 UTC-3, Karen Tracey escribió: >> >> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:15 PM, maxi wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> DatabseFeatures class has a supports_transactions

Re: ``models.BooleanField`` fields default to ``False`` when missing from fixtures

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > Developer of a pet shop software adds: > > feed_before_midnight = models.BooleanField() > > because they're planning on carrying baby gremlins... forgets to update the > zoological XML feed importer to use the

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Ben Slavin wrote: > Hi Russ, > > First, let me apologize for being a bit late to the party on this. If > there's been prior discussion of any of the points below kindly tell me to > get stuffed and so shall I do. You asked for it… :-)

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariai...@thl.fi> wrote: > On 16 syys, 02:15, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> > wrote: > Creating an admin class for no-added-fields extended user model is > somewhat straightforward, although the admi

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

the feedback received to date Based on the feedback on the patch so far, it looks like we're on track to merge this later this week. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Anssi K

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > On 15 syys, 18:59, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: >> With the above commits I can do this: >> >> class MyUser(AbstractUser): >> employee_no = models.CharField(max_length=5) >>

Re: #3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Anssi Kääriäinen <anssi.kaariai...@thl.fi> wrote: > On 15 syys, 15:34, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> > wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The implementation of custom User models is now ready for final >> review

#3011 - Custom User Models -- Call for final review

Hi all, The implementation of custom User models is now ready for final review, prior to commit to trunk. The code is available in my Github repo, in the t3011 branch. https://github.com/freakboy3742/django/tree/t3011 The diff is available here:

Re: Models.py not loaded at server startup ?????

… and this is exactly why the app-refactor has been a topic of discussion for several years. Hopefully we'll get a chance to thrash out some of the details this week at DjangoCon US; I know Preston (who has been working on the patch of late) is keen to discuss what he's done. Yours, Russ Magee

Re: Future url tag behaves unexpectedly

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Klaas van Schelven wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm not really ready to post this as a bug, please help me correct any > possible misunderstandings before I do so. > > I was gently pushed towards the future url template tag due to my > screen

Re: Auto-import support for models and other objects in shell

I'm in complete agreement with Alex. -1 from me. Explicit is better than implicit, and to my mind, hiding imports just complicates the learning curve associated with Django's package tree. If you *really* want this, there are hooks into ipython et al that can do this; I don't see it as something

Re: M2M with to_fields (ticket #18823)

exactly a real world example though i think it demonstrates that > data loss is a possibility. > > Monday, August 27, 2012 5:33:03 PM UTC-7, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:11 AM, peter <peter...@ff.com> wrote: >> > I opened this tic

Re: M2M with to_fields (ticket #18823)

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:11 AM, peter wrote: > I opened this ticket (https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/18823) on the > Trac but thought i'd bring it up here to increase the likelihood of it > getting noticed. In short things don't quite work right when you have a m2m

Re: Yak shaving the test framework on the way to pluggable user models (#3011)

On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Aymeric Augustin <aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 25 août 2012, at 10:15, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > >> We *could* just mark the affected tests that require auth.User as >> "skipUnless(user model == auth.Use

Re: Draft branch: Swappable User models in contrib.auth

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:16 PM, sergzach wrote: > The question about databases. > > Do I understand correctly that if we create a MyUser class (as in your > example) then extra fields (e.g. date_of_birth) will be stored in the same > table of a database with inherited fields

Re: Proposal: Signal connection via "my_app.MyModel"

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > Is there anyone else out there who doesn't like having to import models from > app X into app Y just so that app Y can connect post save signals to them? I can't say the need to import models to set up a signal has

Re: Docs mistake

Hi, Thanks for the report -- if you want to make sure this isn't forgotten, you should open a ticket and describe the fix you think needs to be made. Reporting to the mailing list is helpful, but is just as likely to get lost in someone's inbox. Yours, Russ Magee %-) On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at

Re: Draft branch: Swappable User models in contrib.auth

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Russell Keith-Magee <russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Victor Hooi <victorh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm just wondering, has there been any updates on the User model

Re: Help review tickets, get a prize!

The problem is that we aren't in a position to guarantee that we have the resources to do this all the time. Rather than set the formal expectation that the 5-for-1 deal will always be available, I'd rather keep it as a "Sale now on!" feature that a core developer can announce when they find

Re: Draft branch: Swappable User models in contrib.auth

On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > I believe changes to auth (and several other things) are waiting for > contrib.migrations. It will be some time... Incorrect. The strategy that was approved for trunk won't require migrations unless you want to change

Re: Draft branch: Swappable User models in contrib.auth

On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Victor Hooi wrote: > Hi, > > I'm just wondering, has there been any updates on the User model refactor? > > My understanding is that this is the official way of handling Users going > forward. > > Is there any roadmap on when it might hit

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >