> From the point of view of encouraging the usage of nose, either would
> work fine. I think this is fits in to the conversation at DjangoCon
> about how we should go about encouraging Django users to explore the
> wider Python ecosystem. The important thing is that we can have some
> official (or
On Sep 30, 1:20 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
>
> I was thinking that a calming, motherly "there there, it's all right,
> the boogeymonster isn't real" would do the trick :-)
I'll see what I can do...
>
> I suppose this is a big part of the problem. The logging module isn't
> a trivial API,
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:59 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
>
> On Sep 29, 1:53 pm, Russell Keith-Magee
> wrote:
>>
>> However, since you're interested in feedback, my suggestion would be
>> to look at every defense you've made of logging in this thread (and
>> any other threads where you've had simila
On Sep 30, 5:47 am, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
> I'm yet to be convinced that Nose should be the default test runner
> for the simple reason that it doesn't come out of the box with Python.
> However, I agree that using Nose with Django should be as painless as
> possible. I included the TEST_RUN
On Sep 29, 11:29 pm, Simon Willison wrote:
>
> Here's my understanding of what we need to do for Django.
>
> 1. Create a 'django' logger somewhere in the framework that will
> always be executed if part of Django has been imported - would the
> django/__init__.py file work? Configure that with