On 7/2/06, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How would you feel about making a requirement that settings must be
> configured prior to attempting to use translations. By this, I mean,
> Django must know that it is either using DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE or
> manual configuration prior to
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 21:16 -0500, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> On 7/1/06, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So you could leave the strings in settings.py, providing you define a
> > function called gettext_noop. All this function does is return the
> > string passed to it (that is all
On 7/1/06, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you could leave the strings in settings.py, providing you define a
> function called gettext_noop. All this function does is return the
> string passed to it (that is all it does for real, anyway). Then the
> strings are marked with as
Hi everyone, new to the list. First off, Django rocks for my area of
work, custom biz apps for small business. The admin view is a godsend,
yay team django!
Issue: the recent action block in the admin view does not grow
horizontally so that if the recent action was say a file upload of a
long fil
Sorry again everyone. I don't actually have a specific application.
Allow me to check all the suggestions, take a better look at Django
then I promise I'll come back and summarize my findings.
In the mean time, does the need to tie the views with the models also
apply to the proposed Row Level Pe
On 7/2/06, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are always going to have to specify the weblog_id (or whatever
> condition you are filtering on) somewhere and you are going to have to
> put in some logic somewhere to convert a request into the right
> weblog_id. The latter can be do
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 00:54 -0700, Ahmad Alhashemi wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> I agree that explicitness is better. But I think implicit filtering
> here is not that bad for two reasons. The first is, as I said, it is
> the rule not the exception. The second is that it makes it extremely
> easy to star
On 7/2/06, Ahmad Alhashemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree that explicitness is better. But I think implicit filtering
> here is not that bad for two reasons. The first is, as I said, it is
> the rule not the exception. The second is that it makes it extremely
> easy to start your application
Hi Luke,
I agree that explicitness is better. But I think implicit filtering
here is not that bad for two reasons. The first is, as I said, it is
the rule not the exception. The second is that it makes it extremely
easy to start your application as a single site application then turn
it into a mu
