Re: BitBounce Spam Replies From the Mailing List

I just got one for $2.00. So I assume either the two original "bouncers" fixed their settings and we have a new "bouncer" or one of them changed their dollar amount. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django

Re: RFC: #30053 Allow for conditional QuerySet.update_or_create()

Thanks for taking the time to post here Joshua! The main reason why I asked to gather feedback from this list is that I'm not convinced that the benefits outweighs the additional complexity this will add to the already quite loaded update_or_create() signature handling and how the fact a

RFC: #30053 Allow for conditional QuerySet.update_or_create()

Howdy folks! At the suggestion of Simon Charette, I'd like to get feedback on how the community feels about the feature request #30053 . The gist of the problem is that sometimes the "update" part of "update_or_create" should be conditional. The

Re: BitBounce Spam Replies From the Mailing List

Nevermind, got the $999.99 reply as well :) On Friday, December 28, 2018 at 10:23:07 AM UTC-6, Joshua Cannon wrote: > > I just got one for $2.00. So I assume either the two original "bouncers" > fixed their settings and we have a new "bouncer" or one of them changed > their dollar amount. > --

Re: RFC: #30053 Allow for conditional QuerySet.update_or_create()

I think the use case is probably quite niche, and I'd like to know some more concrete details than the current comment on the ticket "(E.g. only update if the value of a DateTimeField is less than some value)". It may be there's a way to achieve the same application-level outcome using a different