On 2/9/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> However, you have obviously been bitten by a bad error message - I
> would suggest that a good course of action would be to raise a ticket
> with your specific example so that the error reporting of that part of
> the query engine can
"Karen Tracey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> On 2/9/07, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> However, you have obviously been bitten by a bad error message - I
> would suggest that a good course of action would be to raise a ticket
> with your specific example so that th
"Adrian Holovaty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> On 2/9/07, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Entry.objects.filter(
>> _.headline.startswith('What') &
>> ~(_.pub_date>=datetime.now()) &
>> _.pub_date>=datetime(2005, 1, 1))
>
> David,
>
> Looks like you don't like
On 2/10/07, David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> "Karen Tracey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:
> > The fix for #2348 changes the error from "Unbound local error" to "Type
> error: cannot resolve
> > keyword [whatever] into field".
>
> Illustrating just why the current syntax is hard to gi
Since we've removed the priority field from Trac, we don't really have
way to put tickets into a "some day, maybe" sort of state. There are
some tickets that are useful to keep track of, but not really in danger
of being dealt with in the near future. Mostly these are true
enhancement requests or
Adrian,
A few of us are talking to Chris Beaven about getting a SQL Server support
ticket committed (ticket 2358 - http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2358).
The only thing that is not included in the ticket is SQL Server pagination
support (it's a complicated subject). A few of us have been usi
"Karen Tracey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> "Karen Tracey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:
> > The fix for #2348 changes the error from "Unbound local error" to "Type
> error: cannot
> resolve
> > keyword [whatever] into field".
>
> Illustrating just why the current sy
Hi all
The book looks already very good. Congratulation!
But there are some additional things that would be nice to see in the
book.
1. There should be a appendix about Testing like described in the docu
http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/testing/ . (Why is this
document not linked in th
On 2/10/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do we need an "enhancement" resolution, or some other way of saying
> "some day, maybe"? The benefit of this is keeping the very low priority
> stuff out of the queue of things needing attention. Then we can point
> enthusiastic bods at
I remember seeing a nice writeup on using nose with django, which is
both a test runner and a code coverage tool. I can't find it at the
moment, but there's these:
http://code.google.com/p/nose-django/
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/CookBookTestingTools
http://blogs.translucentcode.org/mick/2
On Feb 10, 3:36 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Do we need an "enhancement" resolution, or some other way of saying
> "some day, maybe"? The benefit of this is keeping the very low priority
> stuff out of the queue of things needing attention. Then we can point
> enthusiastic b
On 2/11/07, Gary Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 10, 3:36 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Do we need an "enhancement" resolution, or some other way of saying
> > "some day, maybe"? The benefit of this is keeping the very low priority
> > stuff out of the queue o
check this article:
http://www.rkblog.rk.edu.pl/w/p/django-profiling-hotshot-and-kcachegrind/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-d
On 2/10/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:59 -0600, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> > I'm +1 on that change, despite its backwards incompatibility. It
> > doesn't require much brain power to add import statements to code, so
> > it wouldn't be a *huge* inconve
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 16:07 -0800, Gary Wilson wrote:
> On Feb 10, 3:36 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Do we need an "enhancement" resolution, or some other way of saying
> > "some day, maybe"? The benefit of this is keeping the very low priority
> > stuff out of the queue
On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 08:20 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> On 2/10/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:59 -0600, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> > > I'm +1 on that change, despite its backwards incompatibility. It
> > > doesn't require much brain power
On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 00:15 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> check this article:
> http://www.rkblog.rk.edu.pl/w/p/django-profiling-hotshot-and-kcachegrind/
For anybody like me who hadn't heard of this nifty hotshot2callgraph
tool: turns out it is part of the kdesdk package (on Linux distros).
2007/2/11, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 16:07 -0800, Gary Wilson wrote:
> > How about bringing back the milestone field, making it editable only
> > by Django committers or something. Then, all the ticket reports could
> > be grouped by milestone, and Trac would
Makoto, Michael, Gabor, Ivan:
In the discussion, I'm getting to think that the definition/policy of
the "valid filename (for storage)" may vary for circumstances or fields
where individual developer concerns, thus it should be hard to provide
the ultimate-flawless way for nomalizing filename. Eve
19 matches
Mail list logo
