Re: [GSoC 2012] Improved error reporting

On 15/03/2012, at 1:23 PM, Boris Bobrov wrote: > Hi! > I'd like to participate in GSoC-2012 and the interesting task for me is [0]. > > What kind of plan would you expect from me? Should it be detailed ("I'll fix > error handling in part X by doing A") or it can be more general ("I'll fix >

Re: ANN: Django 1.4 string freeze and translation updates needed

Hello, A second RC was just released [2]; it includes translations contributed until yesterday (roughly 2012-03-14 08:50:00 UTC). If everything goes according to plan, the final 1.4 release will happen on March 21st. We'll probably pull the translations from Transifex on March 20th. I'd like

Custom permissions on proxy model no longer created in 1.4

Hi all, this could very well be one of those "don't do that" things, but here is my problem. I have been using some specific permissions concerning the auth user model, so I created a proxy model on user like this: class User(auth_models.User): class Meta: proxy = True

Re: authentication by email

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 16:57, Clay McClure wrote: >[...] > New django projects can elect to use an entirely different pluggable auth >[...] > The pluggable-auth-apps fork is barely two days old, so it's still rough > around the edges, and I've almost certainly missed some

Re: authentication by email

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 22:53, Danny Adair wrote: >[...] > I'd like to see a later, "proper" auth.user that can undo that chaos. I originally thought you intended a setting which let's the user switch from the existing auth to an email auth with corresponding User

Re: Custom permissions on proxy model no longer created in 1.4

Le 15 mars 2012 10:27, koenb a écrit : > this could very well be one of those "don't do that" things, but here is > my problem. > > I have been using some specific permissions concerning the auth user model (... snip ...) Now I was testing my project with the 1.4

Re: Custom permissions on proxy model no longer created in 1.4

Op donderdag 15 maart 2012 11:52:42 UTC+1 schreef Aymeric Augustin het volgende: > > Le 15 mars 2012 10:27, koenb a écrit : > >> this could very well be one of those "don't do that" things, but here is >> my problem. >> >> I have been using some specific permissions concerning the auth user

Composite Key at Europython

I'd like speak at europython about a project on composite primary and foreign key for Django. https://github.com/simone/django-compositekey This solution that I'm using on a very small realty. I've developed using monkey some patch because the purpose was not forking django. Is more easy

[1.4] SECRET_KEY deprecation is confusing...

Hi, There is a problem in 1.4rc2 where a missing SECRET_KEY causes Django to refuse to start. According to the current version of the release notes on the website: *In Django 1.4, starting Django with an empty SECRET_KEY will raise a DeprecationWarning. In Django 1.5, it will raise an

Re: authentication by email

Tom makes a good point, but you can already store emails in the username, they are just limited to 30 characters or fewer. Lift this length restriction and I will be able to do everything I need without having to wait for contrib.auth2. In the 'I use django to make a living' world the solution

Re: authentication by email

On March 15, 2012, at 11:24 , Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Tom makes a good point, but you can already store emails in the username, > they are just limited to 30 characters or fewer. Lift this length restriction > and I will be able to do everything I need without having to wait for >

Re: authentication by email

Yes it clearly would, however I see two possible solutions to make it more friendly: 1. We provide MySQL, Sqlite3, PostgreSQL instructions on how to do it - I mean the actual commands to execute. 2. Catch the DB error and throw a form validation warning for those that didn't. -Original

Re: authentication by email

That would be a workable compromise, yes? -Original Message- From: Daniel Sokolowski Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:41 PM To: django-developers@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: authentication by email Yes it clearly would, however I see two possible solutions to make it more friendly:

Re: authentication by email

Hi Daniel, On 03/15/2012 09:24 AM, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Why can we not just increase the length limit on the username field?, > Why can't we just throw a validation error if data entered is to long > and the schema has not been updated? I think the answer yes we can and > easily. I don't

Re: authentication by email

On 03/15/2012 09:41 AM, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Yes it clearly would, however I see two possible solutions to make it > more friendly: > > 1. We provide MySQL, Sqlite3, PostgreSQL instructions on how to do it - > I mean the actual commands to execute. > 2. Catch the DB error and throw a form

Re: [1.4] SECRET_KEY deprecation is confusing...

On 03/15/2012 07:52 AM, Nick Pope wrote: > There is a problem in 1.4rc2 where a missing SECRET_KEY causes Django to > refuse to start. > > According to the current version of the release notes on the > website: *In Django 1.4, starting Django with an empty SECRET_KEY will > raise a

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

before we lay this discussion to rest, I would like the dissenters to feast your eyes on this great new feature that *you have approved*: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57270484/Djangocon-EU-2011-Revised-Form-Rendering-Lightning-Talk-by-Gregor-Mullegger and don't forget, this *is coming soon* (at

Re: authentication by email

Carl, I sincerely appreciate your feedback, however again it seems no answers are given except more questions and considerations to consider. Why is it so unreasonable that we expect the end developer to be able to manually adjust their schemas, it's part of an upgrade process and it's been

Re: [GSoC 2012] Improved error reporting

В сообщении от Thursday 15 of March 2012 11:07:03 Russell написал: > Essentially, we're going to be looking for evidence that you understand the > scope of the problem you're proposing to solve. Generic statements like > "I'm going to fix the errors in X" aren't especially convincing by >

Re: authentication by email

On March 15, 2012, at 12:23 , Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Carl, I sincerely appreciate your feedback, however again it seems no answers > are given except more questions and considerations to consider. Why is it so > unreasonable that we expect the end developer to be able to manually adjust >

Re: authentication by email

Ok to recap, The issue here is that django auth is limited, and restrictive and needs hacks to make it use emails as usernames, we can agree on that yes? We can also agree that contrib.auth2 with LFK is a complex undertaking far into the future?. Can we also agree that the 30 character

Re: authentication by email

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Daniel Sokolowski < daniel.sokolow...@klinsight.com> wrote: > The issue here is that django auth is limited, and restrictive and needs > hacks to make it use emails as usernames, we can agree on that yes? I agree with this point. > We can also agree that

Model.save and Model.full_clean

I'm working up a documentation patch to make this spelled out more explicitly but I wonder if there isn't more that should be done. Currently ``Model.full_clean`` is not called automatically when saving a model. This is not a big deal when manually constructing your models as you can just do:

Re: authentication by email

Hi Daniel, On 03/15/2012 11:48 AM, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > The issue here is that django auth is limited, and restrictive and needs > hacks to make it use emails as usernames, we can agree on that yes? Certainly. > We > can also agree that contrib.auth2 with LFK is a complex undertaking far

Re: [GSoC 2012] Improved error reporting

On 16/03/2012, at 2:07 AM, Boris Bobrov wrote: > В сообщении от Thursday 15 of March 2012 11:07:03 Russell написал: > >> Essentially, we're going to be looking for evidence that you understand the >> scope of the problem you're proposing to solve. Generic statements like >> "I'm going to fix