Personally, I like the form exception thing, but if enough people
think it's un-Pythonic or too expensive to use an exception for it,
then I can get behind that.
I like a lot of the stuff in Joseph's proposal, especially the method
of handling read-only fields (that would solve a lot of common
pr
Hi again,
Following some concerns from Adrian, part of the testing patches have
been rolled back (as of r3666). The testing framework itself will
continue to work; however, the 'pseudo client' will be unable to
inspect template specific details.
Apologies for any inconvenience.
Yours,
Russ Mag
On 8/27/06, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> all of these types of things should get as much info as possible out
> of the database/models that exist
> having to retype the relationships sounds yuko to me.
DHH has a thing about that; he doesn't think information about admin
representation
I like the idea.
but the implementation.. ugh.. I don't think it would be useable on
a large scale system.
all of these types of things should get as much info as possible out
of the database/models that exist
having to retype the relationships sounds yuko to me.
but hey... I'm not a ruby g
On 8/27/06, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hadn't seen this mentioned on the lists.
There are a couple of Rails admin systems floating around; one even
(literally) copies the Django admin look and feel.
--
"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
-- Geor
I hadn't seen this mentioned on the lists.
http://streamlined.relevancellc.com/articles/2006/08/02/screencast-available
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this grou
I would be +1 on this if it included the site domain in the user-agent.
having it this way will just cause wikipedia to block it when a
single badly behaving django-bot uses it.
--I
On 27/08/2006, at 12:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Akismet thinks this bug is spam, so I cannot submit it to
While toying around with the new rlp-branch i ran into the following
observations:
Row level permissions work great and as described in the documentation
wiki when objects are being accessed through their admin forms via the
admin index page.
If i try to edit related objects inline (as in the exa
In the following model construction using current svn
RowLevelPermission branch:
class Object:
name=CharField(...)
class Meta:
row_level_permissions=True
class Admin:
grant_change_row_level_perm=True
grant_delete_row_level_perm=True
class ObjectProperty:
object=ForeignKey(Obj
Akismet thinks this bug is spam, so I cannot submit it to Trac.
A URLField will report that all links to en.wikipedia.org are invalid,
because urllib2, along with wget and libwww-perl, are blocked by
default.
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2003-December/019849.html
This is due t
Hi all,Revisions 3658-3661 are the commits of the first two phases of the Django Testing Framework. These changes should have no impact on any existing project. However, should you wish to unit test your Django application, there is now a framework (controlled by ./manage.py test) that will allow y
Hi Alan,
On 8/27/06, Alan Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm having a problem with the Admin "View on site" button. According
[snip]
> My model objects have a get_absolute_url() method, and the View on
> site button appears as expected, however, the "View on site" button
> links to
Hi,
I'm having a problem with the Admin "View on site" button. According
to http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/model_api/#get-absolute-url
all I need to do is add a get_absolute_url() method to my model
objects and the admin interface will gain a "View on site" button that
links to my app
13 matches
Mail list logo
