Re: migrate error

On 23/10/2015 4:23 PM, Christoph Knapp wrote: Ahh OK, the only explanation I have, is that someone already tried to use django on the legacy database and the djando tables were already there. The inspectdb tool put them in the models.py file which caused the error. I did what you said and it

Re: Template variables not showing up in web-page

signature for request is render(request, template_name, context, **kwargs) So it should be like render(request, 'response_page.html', context=context) On Sat, 24 Oct 2015 at 01:21 CTA2052 wrote: > Hello All, > > This may be the most basic question to ask and believe

Template variables not showing up in web-page

Hello All, This may be the most basic question to ask and believe me it does not come without much research and frustration, but I just can't seem to make it work. So I do apologize ahead of time for even having to post it. I am very new to django (2-months), python(4-months) and in fact

Re: solution to static file loading issue on 1.8

Did you try reading the link I provided? If so, what is unclear? On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 1:36:43 PM UTC-4, Becka R. wrote: > > Hi, > > I'd love to understand why, exactly, it did make a difference. All I know > for sure is that after four hours of trying various possibilities, this is

Re: solution to static file loading issue on 1.8

Hi, I'd love to understand why, exactly, it did make a difference. All I know for sure is that after four hours of trying various possibilities, this is what removed the error. Thanks! On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 10:25:23 AM UTC-7, Tim Graham wrote: > > Hi Becka, > > You've provided

Re: solution to static file loading issue on 1.8

Hi Becka, You've provided the default value for STATICFILES_FINDERS so putting that in your settings shouldn't make a difference. An example of STATICFILES_DIRS is given at: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.8/howto/static-files/ If you have a suggestion about how to improve the docs that

High Performance Django Videos Kickstarter

I was one of the original backers for the book and now the Lincoln Loop guys are doing some High Performance Django Videos. For anyone that can help us push this Kickstarter over the top that would be greatly appreciated.

solution to static file loading issue on 1.8

Hi, I just spent hours on this problem, and (at last) stumbled into the Stack Overflow answer, and wanted to preserve this for posterity. I'm using Django 1.8, and wasn't able to get my static files to load on my local server. I finally found the Stack Overflow answe

Re: Iterating over 2 arrays or 1 record array in Django

When you have duplicate keys in a python dict only the second gets saved. You can also refer to positions in tuples with . notation in templates. So something like: Python code: import numpy as npfrom django.template import Template, Context, loaderfrom django.conf import settings dtype={

Re: Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

Indeed, that makes sense! As you said, the issue is that the error message is exactly the same than for a "normal" conflict. Thank you for looking it up. On Friday, 23 October 2015 16:40:46 UTC+2, Simon Charette wrote: > > Hi Gagaro, > > Upon further investigation it looks like the following

Re: Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

On Friday, 23 October 2015 16:35:32 UTC+2, Tom Evans wrote: > > 'Wishlist.user' and 'User.wishlist' are the names of the fields being > discussed. The meaning might be clearer with some added words: > > The reverse query name for the field 'Wishlist.user' clashes with > the field

Re: Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

Hi Gagaro, Upon further investigation it looks like the following thing is happening, you find have a similar example in the documentation . When you define an explicit through model Django

Re: Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Gagaro wrote: > However, I still have a question. The reverse relation is wishlist_set by > default. Why is Django bothered if the attribute is name wishlist (I would > understand if I named my attribute wishlist_set)? The message doesn't

Re: Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

Hi Simon, thanks for the answer, it cleared some things up. However, I still have a question. The reverse relation is *wishlist_set* by default. Why is Django bothered if the attribute is name *wishlist* (I would understand if I named my attribute *wishlist_set*)? On Friday, 23 October 2015

Re: Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

Hi Gagaro, Intermediate models are just like other in this regard, they create a related relation hence the reported clash. You should either add related_name='+' on your Wishlist related fields or give them a unique name. Simon Le vendredi 23 octobre 2015 06:01:30 UTC-4, Gagaro a écrit : >

Re: Issues with django-storages and gunicorn processes

Sorry, I am using Mezzanine, which has a Media Library that uses filebrowser_safe. But this issue isn't specific to Mezzanine. The problem exists in django-storages. The entries property is stored in local memory for each gunicorn worker process. So if you save or delete a file in one worker

Reverse query name clashe with a M2M and through

Hello, I have a situation I don't really understand. I have the following models: class Wishlist(models.Model): wine = models.ForeignKey('Wine') user = models.ForeignKey('User') class Wine(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=32) class User(models.Model): name =

ANN: eGenix mxODBC Connect 2.1.5 - Remote Python Database Interface

ANNOUNCING eGenix.com mxODBC Connect Remote Python Database Interface Version 2.1.5 mxODBC Connect is our commercially supported client-server product