Has anyone relied on the exception silencing behavior as a "feature" when
using {% include %}? It doesn't seem that's really possible given you can't
use that feature when template.debug=True. Thus, the current behavior
doesn't strike me as a reasonable default. Perhaps we can change it after a
deprecation. Does anyone really want an alternative to keep the silencing
behavior?
>From a user's perspective, I think it's more confusing to see a partial and
possibly broken page (but not necessarily knowing that it's broken) than an
error page.
On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 6:17:58 PM UTC-4, Shai Berger wrote:
>
> On Monday 11 July 2016 22:45:31 Florian Apolloner wrote:
> > On Monday, July 11, 2016 at 7:56:34 PM UTC+2, Tim Graham wrote:
> > > As for me as a developer, I'd support removing the exception silencing
> > > that {% include %} does so that errors appear alongside any other
> > > exceptions (e.g. in Sentry) rather than in the django.template logger
> > > (that logging was added in Django 1.9).
> >
> > Dito, most tags should error out where it makes sense, but not sure if
> we
> > can easily change that :(
>
> It must be opt-in; now that we have template engines and they're
> configured in
> dictionaries, we have plenty of room for that, though.
>
> Another option to consider is make them error out only under the
> test-client.
>
> My 2 cents,
> Shai.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/4c2355dc-9ddd-4bad-9677-78cb181f1a32%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
