I just want to say that everything you guys are talking about is so
totally over my head, but I'm stoked you're working it out. Thanks,
guys. :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-dev
On Saturday 23 January 2010 14:29:55 Tobias McNulty wrote:
> That said, I have reservations about any kind
> of across-the-board encoding because it makes it necessary,
> when/if the cookies need to be read by JavaScript, to implement
> that same decode/encode on the client side.
We actually
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:45 PM, Luke Plant wrote:
> On Saturday 23 January 2010 02:44:39 Luke Plant wrote:
>
> > BTW, further research shows that we are not really RFC 2109
> > compliant at all, but then again no-one is. It seems virtually
> > everyone (server side and client side) is using
On Saturday 23 January 2010 02:44:39 Luke Plant wrote:
> BTW, further research shows that we are not really RFC 2109
> compliant at all, but then again no-one is. It seems virtually
> everyone (server side and client side) is using 'Netscape style'
> cookies with some things adopted from RFC
On Saturday 23 January 2010 01:20:55 Sean Brant wrote:
> Whats the downside of fixing this at the core cookie handling
> level? I agree with Luke and only ran across this bug when the new
> messaging framework dropped. However if we are going to fix the
> problem, and I do think it's a problem
On Jan 22, 2010, at 7:04 PM, Luke Plant wrote:
> Well, it depends on what you call the 'spec'. What spec says that
> commas in values is invalid?
>
> The 'spec' linked to on that WebKit bug is a preliminary Netscape
> document, which, as far as I can tell, eventually turned into RFC
> 2109,
On Friday 22 January 2010 19:20:20 Vinay Sajip wrote:
> On Jan 22, 1:53 pm, SmileyChris wrote:
> > If we're to accept that turbogears example, it sounds like we're
> > not properly encoding the cookie in core, rather than patching
> > messages.
>
> Yes, it appears to be a matter of luck that othe
On Jan 22, 1:53 pm, SmileyChris wrote:
> If we're to accept that turbogears example, it sounds like we're not
> properly encoding the cookie in core, rather than patching messages.
Yes, it appears to be a matter of luck that other browsers accept
cookie values which are invalid according to the c
Looking around, this looks like a problem for other frameworks too
(see http://trac.turbogears.org/ticket/1164)
If we're to accept that turbogears example, it sounds like we're not
properly encoding the cookie in core, rather than patching messages.
On Jan 23, 2:23 am, Tobias McNulty wrote:
> Hi
Hi Jeff,
Could you try again without a comma in the message and see if the
CookieStorage starts working again? Either way, that definitely sounds like
a bug to me.
Thanks,
Tobias
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:13 AM, j...@jeffcroft.com wrote:
> Sean-
>
> Can't say for sure it's related, but I can
Sean-
Can't say for sure it's related, but I can verify that I was using
Safari (Mobile) and that my message had commas in them...so it
definitely could be.
Switching to session storage solved the problem for me, and that
backend works fine for my needs. So, it's no longer pressing issue
for me,
I wonder if this is related?
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/5613e9a03d92c902/738a3b81e405dc78#738a3b81e405dc78
On Jan 21, 2010, at 10:55 PM, j...@jeffcroft.com wrote:
> After a little more playing around, I've discovered that this is not
> an issue if I use
After a little more playing around, I've discovered that this is not
an issue if I use the session storage -- so it seems to be related to
cookie storage.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to
Hey guys-
I've been using Django 1.2's new messages framework a lot lately, and
it's awesome. but, i think I may have discovered a bug (or possibly
I'm doing something wrong, but if so, I sure as hell can't figure out
what it is). It seems to me the messages are never delivered to the
user when th
14 matches
Mail list logo