Re: pseudo one-to-one
On 17/01/2012 12:57pm, Bill Beal wrote:
How about this (or has it been mentioned already?): All children in one
table, all with FK to the parent. One FK in the parent pointing to the
one special child. Does there really have to be a one-to-one anywhere?
And I don't understand why anyone needs to chain from child to child.
If they are entered in chronological order, the IDs will be in
numerical order, or else you can add a field to order them.
Bill - this is the direction I'm now taking.
Thanks one and all.
Cheers
Mike
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Mike Dewhirst mailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>> wrote:
On 17/01/2012 4:13am, Jeff Heard wrote:
You might modify the manager to store historical entries in a
different table with the same structure.
I once built a work invoicing system like that where the work
records got transferred from work_in_progress to work_invoiced as
part of the invoicing process. It succeeded nicely because it was
genuinely different information in different tables.
This problem isn't quite the same and I'm reluctant to keep the same
information in two places. There has to be a better way than
multiple tables.
Thanks Jeff
Mike
On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:18 AM, Mike Dewhirstmailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>__>
wrote:
On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote:
Why not have a child model that differs from the
one-to-one child
model in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the
parent?
When another child needs to replace the current one in the
one-to-one relationship, move the child to the second
table where
there is a many-to-one relationship to the parent, then
modify
the one-to-one child record. If necessary, duplicate
the current
one-to-one record in the many-to-one table. Does this make
sense?
I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky.
Thinking about
it some more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on
saving based on the existence of a more modern child.
Dunno.
Thanks
Mike
Bill Beal
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike
Dewhirstmailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>
<mailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au
<mailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>>__>
wrote:
I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one.
The parent instance of my model can only ever have one
current
child instance of another model. Multiple child
instances have to
exist and be kept for the historical record.
The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that
they can be
mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the
parent.
In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the
children
into a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the
Admin?
Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is
there a
better way?
Thanks for any help
Mike
-- You received this message because you are subscribed
to the
Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this
group, send
email to django-users@googlegroups.com
<mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>
<mailto:django-users@__googlegroups.com
<mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>>. To unsubscribe
from this
group, send email to
django-users+unsubscribe@__goo__glegroups.com
<http://googlegroups.com>
<mailto:django-users%__2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:django-users%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>__>.
For more
options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
<http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en>
<http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en
<http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en>>.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed
to the
Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this
group, send
email to django-users@googlegroups.com
<ma
Re: pseudo one-to-one
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. > In -many side add a constraint, unique. Regards, > > The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child > instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist and be > kept for the historical record. > > The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be mapped > together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. > > In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into a > pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? > > Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better way? > > Thanks for any help > > Mike > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscribe@** > googlegroups.com . > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** > group/django-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en> > . > > -- Cristian Salamea @ovnicraft -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
Re: pseudo one-to-one
How about this (or has it been mentioned already?): All children in one table, all with FK to the parent. One FK in the parent pointing to the one special child. Does there really have to be a one-to-one anywhere? And I don't understand why anyone needs to chain from child to child. If they are entered in chronological order, the IDs will be in numerical order, or else you can add a field to order them. On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > On 17/01/2012 4:13am, Jeff Heard wrote: > >> You might modify the manager to store historical entries in a >> different table with the same structure. >> > > I once built a work invoicing system like that where the work records got > transferred from work_in_progress to work_invoiced as part of the invoicing > process. It succeeded nicely because it was genuinely different information > in different tables. > > This problem isn't quite the same and I'm reluctant to keep the same > information in two places. There has to be a better way than multiple > tables. > > Thanks Jeff > > Mike > > > >> >> >> On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:18 AM, Mike Dewhirst >> wrote: >> >> On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote: >>> >>>> Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child >>>> model in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? >>>> When another child needs to replace the current one in the >>>> one-to-one relationship, move the child to the second table where >>>> there is a many-to-one relationship to the parent, then modify >>>> the one-to-one child record. If necessary, duplicate the current >>>> one-to-one record in the many-to-one table. Does this make >>>> sense? >>>> >>> >>> I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky. Thinking about >>> it some more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on >>> saving based on the existence of a more modern child. >>> >>> Dunno. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>>> Bill Beal >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike >>>> Dewhirstmailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>**> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. >>>> >>>> The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current >>>> child instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to >>>> exist and be kept for the historical record. >>>> >>>> The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be >>>> mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. >>>> >>>> In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children >>>> into a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the >>>> Admin? >>>> >>>> Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a >>>> better way? >>>> >>>> Thanks for any help >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>> Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send >>>> email to django-users@googlegroups.com >>>> <mailto:django-users@**googlegroups.com >. >>>> To unsubscribe from this >>>> group, send email to >>>> django-users+unsubscribe@__goo**glegroups.com<http://googlegroups.com> >>>> <mailto:django-users%**2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>>> **>. For more >>>> options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/__**group/django-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en> >>>> <http://groups.google.com/**group/django-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en> >>>> >. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>> Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send >>>> email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this >>>> group, send email to >>>> django-users+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/**group/django-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en> >>>> . >>>> >>> >>> -- You received th
Re: pseudo one-to-one
On 17/01/2012 4:13am, Jeff Heard wrote: You might modify the manager to store historical entries in a different table with the same structure. I once built a work invoicing system like that where the work records got transferred from work_in_progress to work_invoiced as part of the invoicing process. It succeeded nicely because it was genuinely different information in different tables. This problem isn't quite the same and I'm reluctant to keep the same information in two places. There has to be a better way than multiple tables. Thanks Jeff Mike On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:18 AM, Mike Dewhirst wrote: On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote: Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child model in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? When another child needs to replace the current one in the one-to-one relationship, move the child to the second table where there is a many-to-one relationship to the parent, then modify the one-to-one child record. If necessary, duplicate the current one-to-one record in the many-to-one table. Does this make sense? I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky. Thinking about it some more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on saving based on the existence of a more modern child. Dunno. Thanks Mike Bill Beal On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirstmailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>> wrote: I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist and be kept for the historical record. The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better way? Thanks for any help Mike -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com <mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com <mailto:django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
Re: pseudo one-to-one
On 17/01/2012 4:05am, Bill Freeman wrote: Two thoughts: 1. Have both a one to one and a one to many onto the same children. There's no reason that the current child can't be in both relationships, or you could keep them disjoint by "moving" the old current child to the collection when it id displaced by a new child. I like this. Perhaps in the model there could be a 1:1 field with choices= ??? I guess I'll need to experiment. My existing schema has 1:n between parent and children and the children have a 1:1 between themselves forming links in a chain as you suggest below. 2. Have a many to many on self in the child (set) or a one to one (or just foreign key on self (list) so that the current child allows access to the history children. Or am I misunderstanding the problem. Not at all. But I think I'm getting it. If your #1 thought doesn't work I'll try and filter out all children except for the current one and then, in the form for the only visible child, find a way to navigate forward to the not-yet-current one and backward to the immediate predecessor. Thanks Bill Mike Bill On 1/16/12, Mike Dewhirst wrote: On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote: Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child model in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? When another child needs to replace the current one in the one-to-one relationship, move the child to the second table where there is a many-to-one relationship to the parent, then modify the one-to-one child record. If necessary, duplicate the current one-to-one record in the many-to-one table. Does this make sense? I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky. Thinking about it some more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on saving based on the existence of a more modern child. Dunno. Thanks Mike Bill Beal On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirstmailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>> wrote: I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist and be kept for the historical record. The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better way? Thanks for any help Mike -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com <mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com <mailto:django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en <http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
Re: pseudo one-to-one
You might modify the manager to store historical entries in a different table with the same structure. On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:18 AM, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote: >> Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child model >> in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? When another >> child needs to replace the current one in the one-to-one relationship, >> move the child to the second table where there is a many-to-one >> relationship to the parent, then modify the one-to-one child record. If >> necessary, duplicate the current one-to-one record in the many-to-one >> table. Does this make sense? > > I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky. Thinking about it some > more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on saving based on the > existence of a more modern child. > > Dunno. > > Thanks > > Mike > > >> >> Bill Beal >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirst > <mailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>> wrote: >> >>I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. >> >>The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child >>instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist >>and be kept for the historical record. >> >>The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be >>mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. >> >>In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into >>a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? >> >>Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better >>way? >> >>Thanks for any help >> >>Mike >> >>-- >>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>Groups "Django users" group. >>To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com >><mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>. >>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>django-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com >><mailto:django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. >>For more options, visit this group at >>http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en >><http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en>. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Django users" group. >> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
Re: pseudo one-to-one
Two thoughts: 1. Have both a one to one and a one to many onto the same children. There's no reason that the current child can't be in both relationships, or you could keep them disjoint by "moving" the old current child to the collection when it id displaced by a new child. 2. Have a many to many on self in the child (set) or a one to one (or just foreign key on self (list) so that the current child allows access to the history children. Or am I misunderstanding the problem. Bill On 1/16/12, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote: >> Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child model >> in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? When another >> child needs to replace the current one in the one-to-one relationship, >> move the child to the second table where there is a many-to-one >> relationship to the parent, then modify the one-to-one child record. If >> necessary, duplicate the current one-to-one record in the many-to-one >> table. Does this make sense? > > I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky. Thinking about it > some more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on saving > based on the existence of a more modern child. > > Dunno. > > Thanks > > Mike > > >> >> Bill Beal >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirst > <mailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>> wrote: >> >> I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. >> >> The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child >> instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist >> and be kept for the historical record. >> >> The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be >> mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. >> >> In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into >> a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? >> >> Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better >> way? >> >> Thanks for any help >> >> Mike >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Django users" group. >> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com >> <mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> django-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com >> <mailto:django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en >> <http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en>. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Django users" group. >> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
Re: pseudo one-to-one
On 16/01/2012 5:19pm, Bill Beal wrote:
Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child model
in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? When another
child needs to replace the current one in the one-to-one relationship,
move the child to the second table where there is a many-to-one
relationship to the parent, then modify the one-to-one child record. If
necessary, duplicate the current one-to-one record in the many-to-one
table. Does this make sense?
I understand what you mean but it feels a bit yukky. Thinking about it
some more maybe I need a 'hidden' field which gets updated on saving
based on the existence of a more modern child.
Dunno.
Thanks
Mike
Bill Beal
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirst mailto:mi...@dewhirst.com.au>> wrote:
I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one.
The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child
instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist
and be kept for the historical record.
The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be
mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent.
In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into
a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin?
Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better
way?
Thanks for any help
Mike
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com
<mailto:django-users@googlegroups.com>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users+unsubscribe@__googlegroups.com
<mailto:django-users%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/__group/django-users?hl=en
<http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django
users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
Re: pseudo one-to-one
Why not have a child model that differs from the one-to-one child model in that the parent key is now a foreign key to the parent? When another child needs to replace the current one in the one-to-one relationship, move the child to the second table where there is a many-to-one relationship to the parent, then modify the one-to-one child record. If necessary, duplicate the current one-to-one record in the many-to-one table. Does this make sense? Bill Beal On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Mike Dewhirst wrote: > I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. > > The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child > instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist and be > kept for the historical record. > > The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be mapped > together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. > > In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into a > pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? > > Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better way? > > Thanks for any help > > Mike > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django users" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscribe@** > googlegroups.com . > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** > group/django-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en> > . > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
pseudo one-to-one
I need a one-to-many to behave like a one-to-one. The parent instance of my model can only ever have one current child instance of another model. Multiple child instances have to exist and be kept for the historical record. The main benefit of one-to-one relationships is that they can be mapped together (in the Admin) as an extension of the parent. In a view I suppose I can use a manager to filter the children into a pseudo-one-to-one thingy but how do I do this in the Admin? Maybe sort them into date order and only show one? Is there a better way? Thanks for any help Mike -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
