Re: Potential bug: mysql-connector-python Django 3.2.11 and third-party packages that populate the Admin Site

mysql-connector-python 8.0.27 has another bug (see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69900463/django-migration-error-typeerror-sequence-item-1-expected-a-bytes-like-object ) so I did not try it. mysql-connector-python 8.0.26 did not have this problem with Django 3.1. So the bug must have been

Re: Potential bug: mysql-connector-python Django 3.2.11 and third-party packages that populate the Admin Site

can you observe the same behavior in previous versions of connector? You listed two patch versions, makes me curious where in the 8.x version line this works. Likely this is an issue with mysql-connector-python, but with it being an Oracle product, it doesn't have much internal visibility.

Re: Potential bug: mysql-connector-python Django 3.2.11 and third-party packages that populate the Admin Site

Use only the mysqlclient package to populate your admin site with MySQL database. You can watch this tutorial also : https://youtu.be/SNyCV8vOr-g On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 06:19 Richard Mayebo wrote: > Platform: Observed on Ubuntu 20.04 > > >1. Install MySQL (Observed on 5.7 and 8.0) >2.

Potential bug: mysql-connector-python Django 3.2.11 and third-party packages that populate the Admin Site

Platform: Observed on Ubuntu 20.04 1. Install MySQL (Observed on 5.7 and 8.0) 2. Create a Virtual environment using venv, and activate it. 3. Install Django 3.2.11 4. Install mysql-connector-python (Observed on 8.0.26 and 8.0.28) 5. Install django-easy-audit and/or django-axes

Re: Potential Bug in django.contrib.gis

Additional Info: I get this behavious in python 3.6.7, which according to the documentation should be compatible with django 3.1. Janis schrieb am Donnerstag, 3. September 2020 um 17:16:50 UTC+2: > > Hi all, > I recently upgraded django 1.11 to 3.1. Now, in dango 3.1, the following > example

Potential Bug in django.contrib.gis

Hi all, I recently upgraded django 1.11 to 3.1. Now, in dango 3.1, the following example code from https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.1/ref/contrib/gis/geos/#django.contrib.gis.geos.Polygon produces a Segfault. Code snippet: >>> from django.contrib.gis.geos import Point, LineString, Polygon,

Re: potential bug

Forgot about ModelChoise. Thank you. On Sunday, 14 June 2015 22:37:26 UTC+3, Tom Evans wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Mark Nesterovych > wrote: > > Hello. > > I've just finished small django site, and keep going on creating tests. > > I've found and issue

Re: potential bug

On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Mark Nesterovych wrote: > Hello. > I've just finished small django site, and keep going on creating tests. > I've found and issue with Model.objects.values_list method. > Looks like it disregard test database and looks into production

potential bug

Hello. I've just finished small django site, and keep going on creating tests. I've found and issue with Model.objects.values_list method. Looks like it disregard test database and looks into production one. Some details. I have a form with a filed customer =

Re: potential bug with defer() & only()

Hi Will, On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 3:56 PM, William Earp wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm writing some tests #18586) for defer() and only() and there appears to > be a bug when it comes to chaining these two in a single query. > > If you look at the docs ( >

potential bug with defer() & only()

Hi all, I'm writing some tests #18586) for defer() and only() and there appears to be a bug when it comes to chaining these two in a single query. If you look at the docs (https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/models/querysets/#django.db.models.query.QuerySet.only), it says this: #

Potential Bug with hidden_intial_fields

Hello, while working on a mechanism for optimistic offline locking for django modelforms we discovered the following issue: After a failed form validation this forms hidden_initial-fields (rendered via the field argument show_hidden_initial=True) will be rendered containing the submitted

Re: Potential bug in [Typed]ChoiceField validation mechanism

Forgot to add : The problem can be avoided if both set of values are first normalized, as : >>> Decimal('0.50').normalize() Decimal('0.5') Perhaps this should be internally taken care of, instead of relying on the user to normalize it? On Nov 27, 1:04 pm, ethereon wrote: >

Potential bug in [Typed]ChoiceField validation mechanism

In brief, a [Typed]ChoiceField can reject a valid choice of type Decimal because it is incorrectly compared using smart_unicode. Decimal('0.5')==Decimal('0.50') is true, while '0.5'=='0.50' is false. Verbosely, consider a model defined like so : class Foo(models.Model): BAR_CHOICES

Re: Email Backend setting needed, a potential bug

So, I see what has happened. (Interesting it is) I upgraded django to 1.2 to try out: $pip install --upgrade django Then, back to work again: $pip install django==1.1.2 I don't think pip removed the pyc files when replacing, which is making it import mail module. So, This problem should be

Re: Email Backend setting needed, a potential bug

check your django version .It might be that you have django at two places .I m using django 1.1 , have not fount such problem On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Russell Keith-Magee < russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Lakshman Prasad >

Re: Email Backend setting needed, a potential bug

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Lakshman Prasad wrote: > Hi, > Since I upgraded to 1.1.2, I am unable to send mails as django seems > expecting a EMAIL_BACKEND. Something is severely broken with your setup, then. EMAIL_BACKEND is a setting that was introduced in Django

Email Backend setting needed, a potential bug

Hi, Since I upgraded to 1.1.2, I am unable to send mails as django seems expecting a EMAIL_BACKEND. I tried to simply downgrade back to 1.1.1 not having to bother, but the error continues. I seems like a bug, but I don't know how it can be one, because, I cant see how sending email can go

Re: Django Contrib's UserCreationForm (Potential Bug)

On 1/7/10 2:13 AM, Daniel Roseman wrote: > On Jan 7, 4:36�am, Sandman wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Happy new year. >> >> I've been using the svn version of django while developing a small app. >> Yesterday after I updated the code, one of my tests started returning an >> error.

Re: Django Contrib's UserCreationForm (Potential Bug)

On Jan 7, 4:36 am, Sandman wrote: > Hi All, > > Happy new year. > > I've been using the svn version of django while developing a small app. > Yesterday after I updated the code, one of my tests started returning an > error. In fixing this error, I may have uncovered a bug

Django Contrib's UserCreationForm (Potential Bug)

Hi All, Happy new year. I've been using the svn version of django while developing a small app. Yesterday after I updated the code, one of my tests started returning an error. In fixing this error, I may have uncovered a bug but I can't be sure if this is intentional behavior (I'm not really an