Does the following help :-
URL :- http://lmap.co.nr/Amazon1.htm
In the tree, one can browse amazon catalogues based
on the browse id. On reaching the item level (marked
with red dots) one can click on it to view details
such as price, image etc.
Eugene Lazutkin wrote:
> Mochikit is an excellen
On 11/14/05, hugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually the only thing I can think of that would be good if django had
> it, would be a REST style API to access model stuff that automatically
> will be returned in JSON format. That would allow JavaScript code to do
> easy database queries without
Lets make it happen. Who wants to be involved? What form of interaction is
preferred: IRC, e-mails, anything else?
AFAIK, Dojo is built on bones of many projects and directly sponsored by
real life applications like JotSpot (http://www.jot.com). Guys from WebWork
(http://www.opensymphony.com/w
...and of course typically there is a limit on how many items to be returned
for auto-suggest, but taking it into considiration ruins all fun of
arguments. :-)
"Jeremy Dunck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/14/05, Maniac
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I th
On 11/14/05, Maniac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I think this whole approach is wrong and should not be supported.
> There are certain reasons behind separating server and client part and
> wishing to break this barrier smells like a bad design to me. If Django
> will make such things easy the
"Maniac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> But I think this whole approach is wrong and should not be supported.
> There are certain reasons behind separating server and client part and
Care to share these reasons or provide a link to reasons you support?
Unfortun
hugo wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>>Hence, I plead with the proponents of "Ajax support:" Please >show
>>concrete examples of what you want. Enlighten us.
>
>
> Actually the only thing I can think of that would be good if django had
> it, would be a REST style API to access model stuff that automatically
>Lets accept that other people are capable of waving the "extract from a
>working application" magic wand, and take a look at what they found
>rather than starting from scratch and recreating all their bugs.
+1
bye, Georg
Hi,
>I think if I don't get new-admin merged soon, the maintenance will start
>to be a headache, and it will block work on trunk. Also a lot of people
>are using it for a development branch.
+1 from me, as I already use it in my CMS testbed system for a while
and it doesn't produce more problems
Adrian Holovaty wrote:
I've been using XMLHttpRequest for years now. My chicagocrime.org
site, powered by Django, uses Ajax in several places
(chicagocrime.org/map, for one). Django made this very easy. Yet I
still can't fathom what "Ajax support" at the server-side-framework
level *means*.
Hi,
>Hence, I plead with the proponents of "Ajax support:" Please >show
>concrete examples of what you want. Enlighten us.
Actually the only thing I can think of that would be good if django had
it, would be a REST style API to access model stuff that automatically
will be returned in JSON forma
Hi,
>I've been thinking about how Django might leverage DHTML^H^H^H^H^H
>AJAX a lot recently, and I think the framework I'll sketch out below
>should make a bunch of people happy.
my main gripe with your ideas is that you throw RPC style stuff
(XML-RPC and SOAP) in with the REST stuff. That just
"Robert Wittams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I have no idea where you are coming from. The fact that some stuff best
> performed with AJAX is wanted in the admin is clear (see ticket #13) . I
Yep. Just try to reorder stuff without drag and drop. I did it using
2005/11/15, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 11/14/05, limodou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I want to know if there is easy way to create form?
>
> You might want to look over this:
>
> http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/forms/
>
Thanks, I'm looking at it.
--
I like python!
M
"Robert Wittams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I've got to say, this plan sounds like it would lead to *another*, half
> featured AJAX library. Do we really want to reimplement everything? It
> seems like the world needs fewer JS toolkits, not more...
>
> Lets ac
"Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>With that in mind, I still want to comprehend this mysterious concept
>of "Ajax support." In fact, I yearn for it. I want to know what it is,
>desparately.
Let me take a stub at it.
1) Client-side form validation.
2
I have recently discovered the joy of .pth files. I respectfully submit
that having django-admin create one of these for you as part of running
startproject would be a cleaner (and more cross-platform) solution than
what you propose here.
Implementation details aside, +1 for the idea!
Well, if you try to use it with any other db backend atm, you will get
a "NotImplemented" error. That should be pretty clear :-)
The other thing about this patch is it only addresses half the problem
-- there's no support in the model for setting up fulltext indexing.
But hopefully, that will be
Hey djangonistas,
I think if I don't get new-admin merged soon, the maintenance will start
to be a headache, and it will block work on trunk. Also a lot of people
are using it for a development branch.
So, please bang on it, peruse the big diff, and merge it when you are
happy...
Functionality
hugo wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>>>I'm presenting Django to a crowd of 200+ people on Thursday as part
>>>of the London Web Developer Frameworks evening ( http://
>>>blog.unixdaemon.net/cgi-bin/blosxom.pl/2005/10/27 ). I'm putting the
>>>slides together now and I want to do one detailing the various high-
Wilson Miner wrote:
> I think this all sounds great.
>
> I also think Adrian's point in his post about AJAX support is very valid
> here. Any support for AJAX in Django should come from real needs in a real
> project.
>
> As Rob pointed out in an earlier thread, once the new-admin changes are
>
it cheats and there is a 'REALLY_LAST' and a 'REALLY_FIRST' ;-)
most people just use the pre/post dependancies, and only uses the
first/last thing when it has to do with hacks to do set certain
variables before something is run and some of the hooks are set to run
until someone answers it. (which
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:57:10 -0600 Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> 1. There's no way to set the order of the response middleware
> without changing the order of the request middleware. So if you've
> got a middleware that needs to be the first on both request and
> response, you're screwed.
You coul
James Bennett wrote:
> On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>1) Let's keep different forums separate. I hope you responded to those
>>unnamed guys in the IRC channel.
>>2) My car has an integrated CD-player. Does it mean it is "in the core"? I
>>respectfully disagree with yo
Failing usability tests?
if stuff_is_blinking then return YOU_FAIL!!! :-)
"Jeremy Dunck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Nah, it would take all fun from bashing. :-) What kind of code do want to
> see for
On Nov 14, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Ian Holsman wrote:
you might want to implement something similar to what apache2 did with
their hooks.
it sounds pretty complex, but in reality you hardly need to use all
the options.
1. define when the middle ware will be run .. FIRST, MIDDLE, or LAST.
2. define
I think this all sounds great. I also think Adrian's point in his post about AJAX support is very valid here. Any support for AJAX in Django should come from real needs in a real project.As Rob pointed out in an earlier thread, once the new-admin changes are rolled in, the project to fix the edit_i
you might want to implement something similar to what apache2 did with
their hooks.
it sounds pretty complex, but in reality you hardly need to use all the options.
1. define when the middle ware will be run .. FIRST, MIDDLE, or LAST.
2. define which middleware has to run before and which has to
Looks good. It pretty much consistent with my arguments. Unfortunately the
third layer is the most complex one and it is not well defined.
"Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey folks --
Man, it's fun having such smart and passionate people on thi
On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Nah, it would take all fun from bashing. :-) What kind of code do want to
> see for negative statements?
>
Failing tests.
On Nov 14, 2005, at 4:45 PM, Ian Holsman wrote:
I was also thinking of something a whole lot more simplistic as well.
javascript-enabling some of the validators.
I was planing on this being one of the web services views -- a
"validate" view that you would pass a new or modified object into
Hey folks --
As some have pointed out in the past, there are some potential
pitfalls in the current way the middleware API works. As it stands
now, MIDDLEWARE_CLASSES is implemented as a stack: the middleware
bits are called in order on the process_request and process_view
phases, and i
Nah, it would take all fun from bashing. :-) What kind of code do want to
see for negative statements?
"Simon Willison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> On 14 Nov 2005, at 22:37, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>
>> How does this sound to everyone?
>
> Frickin' awesom
On 14 Nov 2005, at 22:37, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
How does this sound to everyone?
Frickin' awesome.
How about an informal rule for this list: no more discussion of Ajax
without code to back it up :)
Cheers,
Simon
I was also thinking of something a whole lot more simplistic as well.
javascript-enabling some of the validators.
for example.. we have a URL field.. it would be nice if the javascript
did the same regex match that the server side did, so that people
wouldn't have to submit it in the first place,
On Nov 14, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
This is a good conversation, and I hope it continues.
Like ships passing in the night... :)
Jacob
Hey folks --
Man, it's fun having such smart and passionate people on this list!
I've been thinking about how Django might leverage DHTML^H^H^H^H^H
AJAX a lot recently, and I think the framework I'll sketch out below
should make a bunch of people happy.
As I see it, there are three layers
This is a good conversation, and I hope it continues.
Here are some thoughts, which I've brought up a number of times over
the past couple of months and remain unresolved.
Django is all about *actual tools that get actual stuff done* -- not
about buzz words, or academic noodling, or "let's make
Inline.
"James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>By "AJAX in the core" I mean "Ships with an AJAX library and both
>makes use of that library in built-in areas and exposes an interface
>for the use of
The most confusing part of the Django tutorial right now is the
futzing around with paths:
"""
Now, take a second to make sure myproject is on your Python path. You
can do this by copying myproject to Python's site-packages directory,
or you can do it by altering the PYTHONPATH environmen
On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Let's keep different forums separate. I hope you responded to those
> unnamed guys in the IRC channel.
> 2) My car has an integrated CD-player. Does it mean it is "in the core"? I
> respectfully disagree with your definition of "in the c
On 14 Nov 2005, at 21:30, Eugene Lazutkin wrote:
I would be happy, if Django supports many libraries, but I don't
think we
can afford it. E.g., I can understand the need for 2 versions of
Admin:
plain vanilla HTML, and Ajax version. If somebody wants to create 3rd
version of Admin, it is f
Inline.
"James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I don't recall anybody proposing "AJAX in the core".
>I've seen it asked for more than once, particularly in the IRC
>channel. People ask for Django
On 14 Nov 2005, at 19:26, Eugene Lazutkin wrote:
I think it is wise to talk to core Dojo guys (e.g., Alex Russell)
about
Django Ajax and explain them what we need. They are accessible and
responsive. I am sure they will meet Django's requirements. Let's
talk to
Bob too to understand his p
I agree with keeping the quality high. There are a few other decent
frameworks out there, but has a lot of people using it who don't really
have to think and just because of that community it turns me off of the
framework.
My example regarding the partner was a situation where the partner is
On 11/14/05, Eugene Lazutkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't recall anybody proposing "AJAX in the core".
I've seen it asked for more than once, particularly in the IRC
channel. People ask for Django to pick one AJAX library and integrate
it. To me, that's "AJAX in the core".
> While Ajax i
I don't recall anybody proposing "AJAX in the core". Clearly Ajax should be
an optional feature. While Ajax is generating a lot of buzz lately causing
adverse reaction in non-marketing people, don't overlook it is potential to
improve usability of web sites. Ajax can be abused, but let's be pra
"""
It seems to me that the original question here is based on a
misunderstanding;
"""
James, you made a good point.
So, when we rate it (1 best):
1 FCGI
2 mod_python
3 SCGI ?
4 Twisted
X runserver (development only)
X+1 CGI (probably performance worse than runserver)
Is it OK for
I want to second the idea of a config variable for saving the session
on each request. I got stuck on a bug where my sessions never seemed
to be saved. I'm creating an shopping engine in django, and need to
store a lot of data in a session, and so I wanted to partition the data
a bit for better
Personally I am leaning towards Dojo over MochiKit.
Disclaimer: I contributed some code to Dojo so I may be biased. Upside: I
know what I am talking about in regards of Dojo.
The reasons are simple: flexible AOP-inspired event system, thought-out
widget packaging and management, versatile I/O.
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:40:06 +0100 Radek Svarz wrote:
> OK, let me mix it:
>
> 1. Django guitar core
"Django bass" would work for this :-)
(providing people understand daft English pronunciation of course)
Luke
--
"Making it up? Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough
as it
On 11/14/05, limodou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to know if there is easy way to create form?
You might want to look over this:
http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/forms/
--
"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
-- George Carlin
On 11/14/05, Stephen Rainey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with you that it's pure marketing fluff and I guess you see that
> was my point. It just got me to thinking when I was reading about
> developer adoption. I do like your lightweight ideas. It might be good
> to do something rather l
On 11/14/05, Radek Svarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe that PythonistL did not asked about running it on CGI. He asked to
> run it on the shared webhosting. And noted some issues.
Django runs perfectly well on shared hosting. Plenty of hosts out
there offer Python/FCGI which is perfectly
# I believe that PythonistL did not asked about running it on CGI. He
# asked to run it on the shared webhosting. And noted some issues.
Right: he didn't ask about running it on CGI; it was just stated that
running it on CGI is his only option, and it's such a nasty one that
he ought to consider
I believe that PythonistL did not asked about running it on CGI. He
asked to run it on the shared webhosting. And noted some issues.
There is no reason to think about using CGI at all as many of you noted.
I believe that there is / will be shared webhosting with mod_python /
fastcgi support. (At
> ( I guess that from this:
>If a Python programmer has a good webhosting ( = share webhosting)
>company, he is happy with, why he should find another one only to
>install Django?)
Because he wouldn't be anymore happy with his webhosting, if he is
forced to run Django under CGI, as that is dead s
Yes, I agree with Radek.
For a wide spreading of Django,
a support for share webhosting ,will be very, very important.
( I guess that from this:
If a Python programmer has a good webhosting ( = share webhosting)
company, he is happy with, why he should find another one only to
install Django?)
# Simon, you are saying that FastCGI serves worse than mod_python?
He said "CGI", which is not the same as FastCGI.
--
Jonathan Daugherty
http://www.parsed.org
On 14 Nov 2005, at 16:40, Radek Svarz wrote:
Simon, you are saying that FastCGI serves worse than mod_python?
I haven't benchmarked, but my suspicion is that their performance
should be about equivalent. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if
FastCGI was faster. SCGI should give great perfo
Simon, you are saying that FastCGI serves worse than mod_python?
IMHO sharedhosting is quite crucial for better Django adoption.
RadekOn 11/14/05, Simon Willison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 14 Nov 2005, at 16:24, PythonistL wrote:> So, would it be possible to make the installation easier also
Simon,but would it be possible to change Django somehow so that a
.htaccess file would be enough?
On 14 Nov 2005, at 16:24, PythonistL wrote:
So, would it be possible to make the installation easier also for
those who use share webhosting ?
Maybe we should document Django-as-CGI, horrible though the
performance will be. We can have a big performance disclaimer
recommending this as a
Hi,
I have been playing with Django for some time and I really like it.
Very few lines of code can make great things.
However, what seems to me as a big limit in Django using is a quite
difficult installation.
Here it is what I mean:
I use a share webhosting, (http://www.imhosted.com). I have use
I agree with you that it's pure marketing fluff and I guess you see that
was my point. It just got me to thinking when I was reading about
developer adoption. I do like your lightweight ideas. It might be good
to do something rather lightweight and then get some visibility on the
website abo
OK, let me mix it:
1. Django guitar core
2. Django ORM beats
3. Django singing templates
4. Django piano admin
You have it novel and self-explanatory, too :)
Radek
On 11/14/05, Jonathan Daugherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
# 1. Django guitar## 2. Django beats## 3. Django singer## 4. Django pi
Hi,
>> I'm presenting Django to a crowd of 200+ people on Thursday as part
>> of the London Web Developer Frameworks evening ( http://
>> blog.unixdaemon.net/cgi-bin/blosxom.pl/2005/10/27 ). I'm putting the
>> slides together now and I want to do one detailing the various high-
>> level component
# 1. Django guitar
#
# 2. Django beats
#
# 3. Django singer
#
# 4. Django piano
Novel, for sure, but wouldn't people have a hard time remembering
which is which?
--
Jonathan Daugherty
http://www.parsed.org
On 11/14/05, Tim Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is attached to ticket #593
> (http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/593). The patch adds a "match"
> lookup_type that gets converted into a where clause entry for a
> full-text search. I'm not convinced this is a good long-term solution,
>
Simon Willison wrote:
>
>
> On 14 Nov 2005, at 07:10, swrainey wrote:
>
>> Ajax is really hot right now and I could see loosing some developers
>> because it's not as on the forefront of the whole web 2.0 hyped up
>> junk. Ajax is more about usability than eye candy or at least it should
>> be
Simon Willison wrote:
>
>
> On 14 Nov 2005, at 06:06, Tom Tobin wrote:
>
>> A bit stumped here . . . Is there a recommended convention for
>> repeating blocks within a template? e.g., I have a paginated
>> object_list generic view, and I want to repeat my pager code (i.e.,
>> "back", "next")
I want to know if there is easy way to create form?
I found atocha is simple, if I need borrow it and use it in django.
http://furius.ca/atocha/
--
I like python!
My Blog: http://www.donews.net/limodou
NewEdit Maillist: http://groups.google.com/group/NewEdit
On 11/14/05, Simon Willison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For me "Ajax support" really is pure marketing fluff - as far as I'm
> concerned EVERY web framework supports Ajax unless it does something
> truly moronic like refuse to let you output documents that don't have
> the standard header/footer
When you named Django after the great jazz muzician, why don't you name
its components similarily? I mean something like:
1. Django guitar
2. Django beats
3. Django singer
4. Django piano
That would be much more "cool" for the public.
Radek
On 14 Nov 2005, at 07:10, swrainey wrote:
Ajax is really hot right now and I could see loosing some developers
because it's not as on the forefront of the whole web 2.0 hyped up
junk. Ajax is more about usability than eye candy or at least it
should
be. That being said. I know I can use aja
On 14 Nov 2005, at 06:06, Tom Tobin wrote:
A bit stumped here . . . Is there a recommended convention for
repeating blocks within a template? e.g., I have a paginated
object_list generic view, and I want to repeat my pager code (i.e.,
"back", "next") at both the top and bottom of the list wi
76 matches
Mail list logo
