Re: [Django] #33768: MySQL ordering of nulls last/first is broken in combination with UNION

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#33768: MySQL ordering of nulls last/first is broken in combination with UNION
-+-
 Reporter:  Florian Apolloner|Owner:  Simon
 |  Charette
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Mariusz Felisiak ):

 In [changeset:"f47fec31f8b51ad8fdc0a5d6805d0130f8700ca8" f47fec3]:
 {{{
 #!CommitTicketReference repository=""
 revision="f47fec31f8b51ad8fdc0a5d6805d0130f8700ca8"
 Refs #33768 -- Fixed ordering compound queries by NULLs on SQLite < 3.30.

 The lack of support for native nulls last/first on SQLite 3.28 and 3.29
 requires the compound query to be wrapped for emulation layer to work
 properly.
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018431be9c77-9a7481f9-f8bc-4705-af24-813e8b3d6a23-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34128: django re-using the name of a squashed migration leads to CircularDependencyError

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34128: django re-using the name of a squashed migration leads to
CircularDependencyError
-+-
 Reporter:  Johannes 'fish'  |Owner:  nobody
  Ziemke |
 Type:  Uncategorized|   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  3.2
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  invalid
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:
 |  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => invalid


Comment:

 Thanks for this ticket, however transition of the squashed migration to a
 normal migration is more complicated and requires removing the `replaces`
 attribute, see [https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/migrations
 /#squashing-migrations docs]:

 > You must then transition the squashed migration to a normal migration
 > - Deleting all the migration files it replaces.
 > - Updating all migrations that depend on the deleted migrations to
 depend on the squashed migration instead
 > - **Removing the `replaces` attribute in the `Migration` class of the
 squashed migration (this is how Django tells that it is a squashed
 migration).**

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018431ad9284-d9c917ea-c4f0-4675-a9d1-f2586406bb99-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit
---+--
 Reporter:  Djing  |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug|   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.admin  |  Version:  3.2
 Severity:  Normal |   Resolution:
 Keywords: | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0  |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0  |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0  |UI/UX:  0
---+--
Changes (by Djing):

 * cc: Djing (added)


Comment:

 The exception is DoesNotExist, and it is thrown by the **to_python**
 method of django.forms.models.**ModelChoiceField**.

 {{{
 def to_python(self, value):
 if value in self.empty_values:
 return None
 try:
 key = self.to_field_name or 'pk'
 if isinstance(value, self.queryset.model):
 value = getattr(value, key)
 value = self.queryset.get(**{key: value})
 except (ValueError, TypeError, self.queryset.model.DoesNotExist):
 raise ValidationError(self.error_messages['invalid_choice'],
 code='invalid_choice')
 return value
 }}}

 The **ModelChoiceField** and it's queryset come from the **add_fields**
 method of django.forms.models.**BaseModelFormSet**. This method builds
 field for pk according to the comment.

 {{{
 # Omit the preceding part...
 if isinstance(pk, (ForeignKey, OneToOneField)):
 qs = pk.remote_field.model._default_manager.get_queryset()
 else:
 qs = self.model._default_manager.get_queryset()
 qs = qs.using(form.instance._state.db)
 if form._meta.widgets:
 widget = form._meta.widgets.get(self._pk_field.name, HiddenInput)
 else:
 widget = HiddenInput
 form.fields[self._pk_field.name] = ModelChoiceField(qs,
 initial=pk_value, required=False, widget=widget)
 # Omit the latter part...
 }}}

 The qs here use the default manager of Model which only shows valid items,
 so invalid item can't be found.

 And I noticed that **BaseModelFormSet** has the correct queryset which
 shows all items when it is created by **ModelAdmin**.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018431922ade-4b7f3f57-f87c-4f63-a364-670052280df9-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit
---+--
 Reporter:  dengjing1994   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug|   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.admin  |  Version:  3.2
 Severity:  Normal |   Resolution:
 Keywords: | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0  |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0  |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0  |UI/UX:  0
---+--
Changes (by dengjing1994):

 * Attachment "third_cannot_edit_anymore.jpg" added.

 3. can't edit anymore once invalid item appear

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/01070184315edc3d-0379b792-ea40-488e-8045-ab99fabfcbae-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit
---+--
 Reporter:  dengjing1994   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug|   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.admin  |  Version:  3.2
 Severity:  Normal |   Resolution:
 Keywords: | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0  |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0  |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0  |UI/UX:  0
---+--
Changes (by dengjing1994):

 * Attachment "second_change_to_invalid.jpg" added.

 2.it's ok to edit item to invalid

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/01070184315dd935-9d81f8c0-de03-4de9-b0cf-2c1adbad2da2-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit
---+--
 Reporter:  dengjing1994   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Bug|   Status:  new
Component:  contrib.admin  |  Version:  3.2
 Severity:  Normal |   Resolution:
 Keywords: | Triage Stage:  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0  |  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0  |  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0  |UI/UX:  0
---+--
Changes (by dengjing1994):

 * Attachment "first_all_valid.jpg" added.

 1. all valid items

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/01070184315d394f-d7613a77-d74b-45f0-8d89-2e15bf762687-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

[Django] #34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34129: Admin list_editable failed to edit
-+
   Reporter:  dengjing1994   |  Owner:  nobody
   Type:  Bug| Status:  new
  Component:  contrib.admin  |Version:  3.2
   Severity:  Normal |   Keywords:
   Triage Stage:  Unreviewed |  Has patch:  0
Needs documentation:  0  |Needs tests:  0
Patch needs improvement:  0  |  Easy pickings:  0
  UI/UX:  0  |
-+
 1. I have two **Manager** for my **Model**, one shows only valid items and
 another one shows all items, and then I change the model's **default
 manager** to the previous one which shows only valid items.
 2. I inherit the **ModelAdmin** and rewrite **get_queryset** method to
 make the queryset use the manager which shows all items.
 3. Add **valid** field to the **list_editable**.
 4. Here comes the bug. When all items are valid, it's ok and I can change
 item to invalid(valid=False) and save. But once there is an invalid item,
 you can't edit it anymore. It just shows "Please correct the error below"
 whithout any other message.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/01070184315c6225-9b39ea9d-e65b-46d2-9e65-33471d9ad9a4-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34123: Ambiguous aliases in ordering on combined queries with select_related().

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34123: Ambiguous aliases in ordering on combined queries with select_related().
-+-
 Reporter:  Shai Berger  |Owner:  David
 |  Sanders
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  select_related   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Simon Charette):

 I figured the origin of the `1st ORDER BY term does not match any column
 in the result set` error; it's another regression introduced by
 c58a8acd413ccc992dd30afd98ed900897e1f719 but solely on 3.28 and 3.29 which
 should be fixed by [https://github.com/django/django/pull/16244 this PR].

 The `select_related` issue remains though. Any help required David?

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/0107018430ee5e36-29e7587d-00a9-499c-a0bf-4785a66e8a85-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34123: Ambiguous aliases in ordering on combined queries with select_related().

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34123: Ambiguous aliases in ordering on combined queries with select_related().
-+-
 Reporter:  Shai Berger  |Owner:  David
 |  Sanders
 Type:  Bug  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Release blocker  |   Resolution:
 Keywords:  select_related   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by David Sanders):

 Just FYI re:

 {{{
 django.db.utils.DatabaseError: ORDER BY not allowed in subqueries of
 compound statements.
 }}}

 SQLite doesn't support limits & ordering in compound statments:
 https://www.sqlite.org/lang_select.html#compound_select_statements

 The error we're seeing here is a Django feature flag checking the presence
 of an order by. The `Author` model in the test has a default `ordering`
 which is causing this.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701842eec4f43-ff2a0804-ba15-4fb2-beb8-983241d53347-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #21604: Embed raw queries as subqueries when used with an __in filter

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#21604: Embed raw queries as subqueries when used with an __in filter
-+-
 Reporter:  alex@…   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  new
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  1
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-

Comment (by Simon Charette):

 Andreas, if this is something you'd like to see in Django
 [https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/4.1/internals/contributing/writing-
 code/ you could give a shot submitting a PR] based on the approach
 described in comment:3

 Something along these lines, with regression tests, should get you almost
 all the way there

 {{{#!diff
 diff --git a/django/db/models/sql/query.py b/django/db/models/sql/query.py
 index c2a71ff589..4845ae9e90 100644
 --- a/django/db/models/sql/query.py
 +++ b/django/db/models/sql/query.py
 @@ -82,6 +82,8 @@ def get_children_from_q(q):
  class RawQuery:
  """A single raw SQL query."""

 +has_select_fields = True
 +
  def __init__(self, sql, using, params=()):
  self.params = params
  self.sql = sql
 @@ -151,6 +153,9 @@ def _execute_query(self):
  self.cursor = connection.cursor()
  self.cursor.execute(self.sql, params)

 +def as_sql(self, compiler, connection):
 +return self.sql, self.params
 +

  ExplainInfo = namedtuple("ExplainInfo", ("format", "options"))
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701842e4e5608-b38b9dfd-2d97-4cbd-ba0f-76b98e2314ab-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34128: django re-using the name of a squashed migration leads to CircularDependencyError

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34128: django re-using the name of a squashed migration leads to
CircularDependencyError
-+-
 Reporter:  discordianfish   |Owner:  nobody
 Type:  Uncategorized|   Status:  new
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  3.2
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:
 |  Unreviewed
Has patch:  0|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Description changed by discordianfish:

Old description:

> Hi,
>
> I've squashed two migrations,  creating this file:
> ```
> # Generated by Django 3.2 on 2022-10-30 14:15
>
> from django.db import migrations, models
>

> class Migration(migrations.Migration):
>
> replaces = [('api', '0005_achievement_difficulty'), ('api',
> '0006_alter_achievement_difficulty')]
>
> dependencies = [
> ('api',
> '0004_achievement_squashed_0005_alter_achievement_submission'),
> ]
>
> operations = [
> migrations.AddField(
> model_name='achievement',
> name='difficulty',
> field=models.SmallIntegerField(default=0),
> ),
> ]
> ```
>
> After rolling out the change, I've deleted 0005_achievement_difficulty
> and 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty.
>
> Now I've did some more changes to the model, causing django to create the
> following 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty:
> ```
> # Generated by Django 3.2 on 2022-10-31 12:59
>
> from django.db import migrations, models
>

> class Migration(migrations.Migration):
>
> dependencies = [
> ('api',
> '0005_achievement_difficulty_squashed_0006_alter_achievement_difficulty'),
> ]
>
> operations = [
> migrations.AlterField(
> model_name='achievement',
> name='difficulty',
> field=models.SmallIntegerField(),
> ),
> ]
> ```
>
> Which leads to the following error:
> ```
>   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.10/site-
> packages/django/db/migrations/graph.py", line 274, in ensure_not_cyclic
> raise CircularDependencyError(", ".join("%s.%s" % n for n in cycle))
> django.db.migrations.exceptions.CircularDependencyError:
> api.0005_achievement_difficulty_squashed_0006_alter_achievement_difficulty
> ```
>
> Renaming the migration file to 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty_new.py
> fixed it.
>
> While I wouldn't rule out a mistake on my side, it seems the way django
> creates the migration name can lead to new migrations being named like
> squashed and removed ones, causing the dependency check to wrongfully
> assume the squashed migration would depend on it.

New description:

 Hi,

 I've squashed two migrations,  creating this file:
 {{{
 # Generated by Django 3.2 on 2022-10-30 14:15

 from django.db import migrations, models


 class Migration(migrations.Migration):

 replaces = [('api', '0005_achievement_difficulty'), ('api',
 '0006_alter_achievement_difficulty')]

 dependencies = [
 ('api',
 '0004_achievement_squashed_0005_alter_achievement_submission'),
 ]

 operations = [
 migrations.AddField(
 model_name='achievement',
 name='difficulty',
 field=models.SmallIntegerField(default=0),
 ),
 ]
 }}}

 After rolling out the change, I've deleted 0005_achievement_difficulty and
 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty.

 Now I've did some more changes to the model, causing django to create the
 following 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty:
 {{{
 # Generated by Django 3.2 on 2022-10-31 12:59

 from django.db import migrations, models


 class Migration(migrations.Migration):

 dependencies = [
 ('api',
 '0005_achievement_difficulty_squashed_0006_alter_achievement_difficulty'),
 ]

 operations = [
 migrations.AlterField(
 model_name='achievement',
 name='difficulty',
 field=models.SmallIntegerField(),
 ),
 ]
 }}}

 Which leads to the following error:
 {{{
   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.10/site-
 packages/django/db/migrations/graph.py", line 274, in ensure_not_cyclic
 raise CircularDependencyError(", ".join("%s.%s" % n for n in cycle))
 django.db.migrations.exceptions.CircularDependencyError:
 api.0005_achievement_difficulty_squashed_0006_alter_achievement_difficulty
 }}}

 Renaming the migration file to 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty_new.py
 fixed it.

 While I wouldn't rule out a mistake on my side, it seems the way django
 creates the migration name can lead to new migrations being named like
 squashed and removed ones, causing the de

[Django] #34128: django re-using the name of a squashed migration leads to CircularDependencyError

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34128: django re-using the name of a squashed migration leads to
CircularDependencyError
-+-
   Reporter: |  Owner:  nobody
  discordianfish |
   Type: | Status:  new
  Uncategorized  |
  Component:  Database   |Version:  3.2
  layer (models, ORM)|
   Severity:  Normal |   Keywords:
   Triage Stage: |  Has patch:  0
  Unreviewed |
Needs documentation:  0  |Needs tests:  0
Patch needs improvement:  0  |  Easy pickings:  0
  UI/UX:  0  |
-+-
 Hi,

 I've squashed two migrations,  creating this file:
 ```
 # Generated by Django 3.2 on 2022-10-30 14:15

 from django.db import migrations, models


 class Migration(migrations.Migration):

 replaces = [('api', '0005_achievement_difficulty'), ('api',
 '0006_alter_achievement_difficulty')]

 dependencies = [
 ('api',
 '0004_achievement_squashed_0005_alter_achievement_submission'),
 ]

 operations = [
 migrations.AddField(
 model_name='achievement',
 name='difficulty',
 field=models.SmallIntegerField(default=0),
 ),
 ]
 ```

 After rolling out the change, I've deleted 0005_achievement_difficulty and
 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty.

 Now I've did some more changes to the model, causing django to create the
 following 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty:
 ```
 # Generated by Django 3.2 on 2022-10-31 12:59

 from django.db import migrations, models


 class Migration(migrations.Migration):

 dependencies = [
 ('api',
 '0005_achievement_difficulty_squashed_0006_alter_achievement_difficulty'),
 ]

 operations = [
 migrations.AlterField(
 model_name='achievement',
 name='difficulty',
 field=models.SmallIntegerField(),
 ),
 ]
 ```

 Which leads to the following error:
 ```
   File "/usr/local/lib/python3.10/site-
 packages/django/db/migrations/graph.py", line 274, in ensure_not_cyclic
 raise CircularDependencyError(", ".join("%s.%s" % n for n in cycle))
 django.db.migrations.exceptions.CircularDependencyError:
 api.0005_achievement_difficulty_squashed_0006_alter_achievement_difficulty
 ```

 Renaming the migration file to 0006_alter_achievement_difficulty_new.py
 fixed it.

 While I wouldn't rule out a mistake on my side, it seems the way django
 creates the migration name can lead to new migrations being named like
 squashed and removed ones, causing the dependency check to wrongfully
 assume the squashed migration would depend on it.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701842e2d92de-c538ff9b-71f6-466c-af37-c4cfcea81b42-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #16211: using negated F()-expression in update query

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#16211: using negated F()-expression in update query
-+-
 Reporter:  Walter Doekes|Owner:  David
 |  Wobrock
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  closed
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 * status:  assigned => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 Fixed in a320aab5129f4019b3c1d28b7a3b509582bc56f9.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701842dd308ff-30044e3b-a297-4cdc-b8b4-80a71862ff46-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #34112: Add async interface to Model

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#34112: Add async interface to Model
-+-
 Reporter:  Adam Johnson |Owner:  Bhuvnesh
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Accepted
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Bhuvnesh):

 * needs_better_patch:  1 => 0


Comment:

 [https://github.com/django/django/pull/16242 UPDATED PR]

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701842d3b2d3c-57b67c74-95ff-422d-8fc5-bc1c81e22bd7-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.

Re: [Django] #16211: using negated F()-expression in update query

2022-10-31 Thread Django 
#16211: using negated F()-expression in update query
-+-
 Reporter:  Walter Doekes|Owner:  David
 |  Wobrock
 Type:  New feature  |   Status:  assigned
Component:  Database layer   |  Version:  dev
  (models, ORM)  |
 Severity:  Normal   |   Resolution:
 Keywords:   | Triage Stage:  Ready for
 |  checkin
Has patch:  1|  Needs documentation:  0
  Needs tests:  0|  Patch needs improvement:  0
Easy pickings:  0|UI/UX:  0
-+-
Changes (by Mariusz Felisiak):

 * needs_better_patch:  1 => 0
 * stage:  Accepted => Ready for checkin


-- 
Ticket URL: 
Django 
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-updates+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/010701842d2de7d1-32284ae4-5e53-47b0-bf5a-a664eb3f75fa-00%40eu-central-1.amazonses.com.