Wow, the new docs look fantastic.
I've been using Sphinx to generate some docs at work and recently
figured out how to do the Sphinx -> LaTeX -> PDF thing so I thought
I'd share it with the class:
http://postneo.com/doc/django.pdf
I had to tweak conf.py a little to get it working. Here's the
Is there any similar event happening in the nyc area?
just wondering.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Jonathan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> I'm planning a get together the night before DjangoCon for people
> going to the conference. I figured it would be nice to get to know
> each
I think the TWID guys are doing something as well. Might want to combine
groups.
Eric
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Jonathan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> I'm planning a get together the night before DjangoCon for people
> going to the conference. I figured it would be nice to get
I'm planning a get together the night before DjangoCon for people
going to the conference. I figured it would be nice to get to know
each other a bit better before sitting in a conference together all
weekend.
I'm assuming that most people are going to be staying at the Hotel
Avante where the
However, it'd still be nice to see these chunks be somehow related to
a flatpage. Maybe one day the we'll have a "chunky-flatpages" app so
they can share some sort of relation...
On Aug 20, 10:57 pm, lingrlongr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that will work well. Thanks! =)
>
> On Aug 20,
Also django-assets
On Aug 20, 2008, at 21:57, lingrlongr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think that will work well. Thanks! =)
>
> On Aug 20, 10:40 pm, Justin Lilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You may want to check out django-chunks. I'm pretty sure it does what
>> you are looking for.
>>
I think that will work well. Thanks! =)
On Aug 20, 10:40 pm, Justin Lilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You may want to check out django-chunks. I'm pretty sure it does what
> you are looking for.
>
> -justin
>
> On Aug 20, 2008, at 4:41 PM, lingrlongr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I
You may want to check out django-chunks. I'm pretty sure it does what
you are looking for.
-justin
On Aug 20, 2008, at 4:41 PM, lingrlongr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have found that the Flatpages application is very useful, especially
> in projects where you create a site for
I have found that the Flatpages application is very useful, especially
in projects where you create a site for someone else and you allow
them to change the content as they need. The only drawback with the
application, however, is that there's only one block/section of
modifiable content.
My
I know everyone's got their pet tickets they want to make sure get
into trunk but I wanted to bring up http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7947
which deals with some breakage in editing 1:1 fields. I can attest
that the patch does fix the problem we see in Satchmo but there are
some other cases
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 12:10 -0700, Matt Boersma wrote:
[...]
> I now think reintroducing the extra_select approach might work better,
> and perhaps could fix the GeoDjango issues as well.
There's still the offer to add an extra paramater axis to the tuple
inside extra_select if that helps at
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Justin Fagnani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Brian Rosner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I am slightly unclear on what is allowed to
>> be broken in this phase of Django development. I suspect it is okay
>> since those methods are
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 12:13 -0700, Dan Watson wrote:
> On Aug 14, 5:29 pm, Dan Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As mentioned a few times in #2070, uploaded files large enough to be
> > streamed to a temporary file get created with a mode of 0600, as per
> > python's tempfile.mkstemp. This
On Aug 14, 5:29 pm, Dan Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As mentioned a few times in #2070, uploaded files large enough to be
> streamed to a temporary file get created with a mode of 0600, as per
> python's tempfile.mkstemp. This causes two problems:
>
> 1. Files uploaded into memory and
On Aug 20, 1:01 pm, Justin Bronn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Item.objects.dates('created', 'day')[0]
> > DatabaseError: ORA-00923: FROM keyword not found where expected
>
> That's the exact error that's giving me problems -- I think it's one
> of the same issue as I'm having. It's because of
> Item.objects.dates('created', 'day')[0]
> DatabaseError: ORA-00923: FROM keyword not found where expected
That's the exact error that's giving me problems -- I think it's one
of the same issue as I'm having. It's because of the `col.rsplit('.',
1)[1]` logic in Oracle's `as_sql` when doing
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 10:03 -0700, Matt Boersma wrote:
> On Aug 20, 10:50 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > There's one SQL syntax error that I can't fix, however (in
> > regressiontests/queries/models.py). I'll look at the pickling issue
> > there, but the SQL problem I
TP wrote:
> I recently ran into what I thought was counter-intuitive session
> expiration behavior. See ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8452
> for the details.
>
> I don't mean to dig up topics that have been long debated, but I also
> wonder if these semantics make sense?
>
> If I
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Brian Rosner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am slightly unclear on what is allowed to
> be broken in this phase of Django development. I suspect it is okay
> since those methods are not explicitly documented and a quick note on
> the wiki would be decent. Someone
On Aug 20, 10:50 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> There's one SQL syntax error that I can't fix, however (in
> regressiontests/queries/models.py). I'll look at the pickling issue
> there, but the SQL problem I can't debug.
If you mean this one:
Item.objects.dates('created',
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 09:47 -0700, Matt Boersma wrote:
> Hi Justin,
>
> Sorry, I should have run the gis tests as well. (Is that Malcom
> snickering I hear? I'm chastened.)
I'm not snickering. We're chasing a lot of things here and cascading
changes are kind of to be expected. Just like they
I recently ran into what I thought was counter-intuitive session
expiration behavior. See ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8452
for the details.
I don't mean to dig up topics that have been long debated, but I also
wonder if these semantics make sense?
If I log into a site and only
Hi Justin,
Sorry, I should have run the gis tests as well. (Is that Malcom
snickering I hear? I'm chastened.)
Did GeoDjango break in r8426 then, as Oracle in general did? That's
where extra_select changed. I can see how our new code in r8445
breaks on your function column.
I'll look at it
> Rather than flag "row_number()" as an extra_select parameter (and then
> try to clean up after it later), Oracle now just uses the default
> set_limits and clear_limits methods and does all extra query munging
> in its as_sql() method. And instead of doing an outer SELECT *, we
> SELECT
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:57 AM, Justin Fagnani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ps. The *_factory methods seem odd to me. I wonder why metaclasses
> weren't used here, but I understand that it's to close to 1.0 change
> anything.
Ah, missed this in the first e-mail. There was an effort to do this,
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:57 AM, Justin Fagnani
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure what parts of BaseModelFormSet are considered official
> API. In the patch ModelForm.save() is now called by
> ModelFormSet.save(), and I think the methods save_new, save_existing,
> save_existing_objects,
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:01 AM, James Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Quite understandable that this isn't a priority by any means, ticket
> including patch is up here for posterity:
> http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8447
The patch was a bit off; it used iteritems in iterlists in
Quite understandable that this isn't a priority by any means, ticket
including patch is up here for posterity:
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8447
On Aug 20, 9:20 am, "Jeremy Dunck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Malcolm Tredinnick<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Malcolm Tredinnick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
>> Also because of this should 8399, trivial as it is, go up on
>> BackwardsIncompatibleChanges?
>
> Yes, it should. Hopefully Gary (Wilson) will see this and make the
> change, since it was his commit. It was no
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 02:29 -0700, zvoase wrote:
[...]
> What I'm doing now is changing the method to POST, accessing the
> request.raw_post_data attribute, and then changing the method back to
> PUT. This seems a little unnecessary, and I'd like to suggest the
> addition of a content attribute
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 22:09 -0700, James Turk wrote:
[...]
> It seems that changing my code to use lists will give almost the same
> result, but would it be possible to get an "iterlists" method to
> replace the iteritems which was changed?
This is probably worth leaving until after 1.0 for
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> The best way to send me code is by letting me know about your remote
> git repo. Or use git-format-patch and send me patches. I can't really
> spare time to help with git, but someone in #django-dev probably can
>
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:36 AM, Ivan Sagalaev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does "no need for bug reports" apply only to presentation or to content
> as well? I'm asking because I've found an old-style `class Admin` your
> request declaration in an example in "Django at a glance" and I'm not
>
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 2:36 AM, Ivan Sagalaev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>> I've also put a built version of the docs online at
>> http://docs.djangoproject.com/dev/. There are some problems with the
>> version online right now; no need for bug reports since I'll be
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The docs refactor work is pretty much done; now I need a bunch more
> eyes to look things over. There's still a bunch of TODOs (see below),
> but it's better than the current docs and maintaining branched docs
I wish the fonts were bigger all around. Less wasted space on the left
and right and bigger, more readable fonts. If you're quickly scanning
the page, looking for something in particular, it's easier if the
fonts are a little bigger. Even in the existing docs, it's difficult
for some of
I have just a tiny suggestions... could you make the headlines a bit
bigger or with more space around them? When scrolling, there is no
real distinction between different parts. I always found that a bit
unusable in the Django docs. You just have a large stream of text and
your eyes are unable to
Hi,
There seems to be an issue with Django in the HttpRequest class, in
that I cannot access the data provided in a HTTP PUT request. I'm
writing a web app which uses a RESTful interface, but at the moment I
have to put together a piece of hacky middleware in order to be able
to get the PUT data.
I attached a patch to #8160 that fixes this issue (and probably #8071).
I'm not sure what parts of BaseModelFormSet are considered official
API. In the patch ModelForm.save() is now called by
ModelFormSet.save(), and I think the methods save_new, save_existing,
save_existing_objects, and
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> I've also put a built version of the docs online at
> http://docs.djangoproject.com/dev/. There are some problems with the
> version online right now; no need for bug reports since I'll be
> changing the online version to better fit into the django site over
> the next
40 matches
Mail list logo
