Jacob says:
> Yeah, I don't think I explained myself well enough; let me give a concrete
> example of why I'd like this:
Thanks, Jacob, it helps to see things from other perspectives and
especially in that case I agree the gains are well worthwhile.
I was thinking also about how this might work
On Dec 19, 2005, at 10:30 PM, oggie rob wrote:
Jacob says:
I kinda think it should be::
class Poll(Model):
...
class Choice(Model):
poll = ForeignKey(Poll)
class ADMIN:
edit_inline_on_relation = 'poll'
But in (almost?) all other ways the admin section r
Jacob says:
> I kinda think it should be::
>
> class Poll(Model):
> ...
>
> class Choice(Model):
>poll = ForeignKey(Poll)
>
>class ADMIN:
>edit_inline_on_relation = 'poll'
But in (almost?) all other ways the admin section represents the view
for the current
On Dec 19, 2005, at 8:48 PM, oggie rob wrote:
One comment: something that has been bugging me for a while is the
location where you specify the inline behaviour.
For example (using the Poll/Choice models):
class Choice(meta.Model):
poll = meta.ForeignKey(Poll, edit_inline=meta.STACKED,
num_
> Questions? Comments? Concerns?
One comment: something that has been bugging me for a while is the
location where you specify the inline behaviour.
For example (using the Poll/Choice models):
class Choice(meta.Model):
poll = meta.ForeignKey(Poll, edit_inline=meta.STACKED,
num_in_admin=3)
S
On 12/19/05, Robert Wittams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There are quite a lot of changes in this area being considered in the
> magic-removal branch.
I figured as much. Is there any sort of estimated timeframe for the
merge of the magic-removal branch into the trunk?
> Here are a few example
On Dec 19, 2005, at 6:55 PM, Eugene Lazutkin wrote:
If you need any help, write me.
I will; thanks.
I would suggest to keep an eye on potential reusability of your
widgets. It
would be nice to use them in custom interfaces.
Yeah, depending on how well it works I might write Dojo widgets
"Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> (c) the new edit-inline interface will rely heavily on Javascript (AJAX)
> to do its job.
+1.
> Also, this means it's probably time to decide on a JS toolkit to bundle
> with Django and use in the admin. As
> > 2) A 'columns' keyword to restrict column returns
> This already exists; look at the get_values() function:
Right idea, not quite the complete implementation. 'fields' only
applies to get_values, and the 'fields' kwarg isn't utilized by the sql
query itself. The SQL query still retrieves all
Hey folks --
I'm starting to gear up on the removing core fields bit, and before I
get too deep into it I want to run my plan by everyone:
First, "core" as a field option will die. Until 1.0 it will be
accepted and ignored -- but django-admin validate will complain about
it. 1.0 will r
On 12/19/05, Dody Suria Wijaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree. Part of the reason Plone was really popular because it's so
> easy to install, and behave like normal Windows software. This means
> daemon-like software always present as Windows Service, and get
> started/stopped via familiar i
Hi Adrian. I have been doing a bit more investigating today and some
threading experiments first. Maybe something will come from it. Like I
say, I am not a Windows person myself ;-). I will also likely try a
couple other servers to see where this goes. It may just be
experimentation for now u
I agree. Part of the reason Plone was really popular because it's so
easy to install, and behave like normal Windows software. This means
daemon-like software always present as Windows Service, and get
started/stopped via familiar interface. Django so far has not as easy as
it could be. Packa
Thanks for this. I have been reading up quite a bit on threading and
also windows services. I am not much of a windows user but sometimes
you find yourself needing to do things with it. For me Mac is great and
Unix of course.
Regards,
David
PythonistL wrote:
David,
Check this
http://group
Robert Wittams wrote:
> I noticed louie requires python 2.4. Django is currently supporting 2.3
> upwards. How hard would it be to support 2.3?
Louie 1.0 is now out, and supports both Python 2.3 and Python 2.4:
http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi/Louie
Help!
I'm _completely_ snowed under- does anyone else feel like moving this
code across from Melt?
Cheers,
Matt
On 12/19/05, David Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Ian. Thanks for your reply. It does, however I was looking at this
> from the perspective of running the small httpserver as its own service
> when Django is installed on a Windows machine for development. Is there
> any interest in this?
H
plisk wrote:
> Yeah, its OK to have more than one value of the same param and wrap all
> of them in the list. But when you have only one parameter value passed
> making a list for it is at least inconsistent with the value you get
> from request.GET['param'] which is just a scalar and this also br
David,
Check this
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_frm/thread/a96176dc9f3a83c9/ea6b8addfc702605#ea6b8addfc702605
It may help
I'm working on implementation of I18NCharField, so far I come with this:
class I18NCharField(RelatedField):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
self.from_ = None
self.maxlength = kwargs['maxlength']
super(I18NCharField, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
#
def
I see, but what you get on admin forms from GET is hardly expected. So
i guess this part in add_stage should be fixed ? I'll file a ticket for
it.
Lines 432-436 of django/contrib/admin/views/main.py
# Add default data.
new_data = manipulator.flatten_data()
# Override the
On 12/19/05, plisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it expected behaviour when opening /foo/?test=1 request.GET['test']
> returns 1, but request.GET returns {'test': ['1']}, where '1' is
> enclosed in the list ? Shouldn't it also be just {'test': '1'} ?
> Because of this you can see on the add form
Hey Russ -
I'm still reading through your proposal, but one quick note:
On Dec 19, 2005, at 12:30 AM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
2) A 'columns' keyword to restrict column returns
This already exists; look at the get_values() function: http://
www.djangoproject.com/documentation/db_api/#get-
Hi Ian. Thanks for your reply. It does, however I was looking at this
from the perspective of running the small httpserver as its own service
when Django is installed on a Windows machine for development. Is there
any interest in this?
Regards,
David
Ian Holsman wrote:
doesn't Apache HTTP
I changed the app name to backend, and things are working great now.
The process is not easy, so I noted the steps required. I did not know
if there was an automated way to do this, if there is -- please let me
know.
1. rename the directory under apps directory to your new app name
2. edit /apps
Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a few suggestions that I think could increase the the
> capabilities and expressiveness of Django DB query syntax. The
> modifications are aimed at increasing usage of Django DB syntax (in
> preference to embedded raw SQL), and increasing the range
Yeah, its OK to have more than one value of the same param and wrap all
of them in the list. But when you have only one parameter value passed
making a list for it is at least inconsistent with the value you get
from request.GET['param'] which is just a scalar and this also breaks
some parts in ad
Isn't it's permissible to have multiple parameter names in HTML? like:
/foo/?id=1&id=2
--> {'id':['1','2']}
instead of overwriting each other...
plisk wrote:
Hi all,
Is it expected behaviour when opening /foo/?test=1 request.GET['test']
returns 1, but request.GET returns {'test': ['1']}, wh
Hi all,
Is it expected behaviour when opening /foo/?test=1 request.GET['test']
returns 1, but request.GET returns {'test': ['1']}, where '1' is
enclosed in the list ? Shouldn't it also be just {'test': '1'} ?
Because of this you can see on the add forms in admin in text fields
values like ['bar']
> the _() global translation function is getting reassigned to a
>dictionary. See the test output below.
Weird. Did you add a print to see _what_ is assigned to _? Maybe there
is some code in there where _ is used as an anonymous variable (seen
that in the code in several places) and so the built
30 matches
Mail list logo
