Re: Inappropriate behavior [was: Re: default delete() clear() behavior and you.]

sorry. my intention wasn't to make light of violence of any nature. the image i posted was an actual ad for las vegas. i just returned from there (for the millionth time, i have family that live there.. not the biggest fan of vegas) ... and thus it was on my mind. i will contain my sardonic wit

Inappropriate behavior [was: Re: default delete() clear() behavior and you.]

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Kevin howerton wrote: > ps.  I didn't really murder a hooker in vegas This sort of "joke" is highly offensive, and isn't appropriate here. Frankly, I don't think it's appropriate *anywhere*, but I actually have some power to stop this sort of crap here, and I'm usi

Re: default delete() clear() behavior and you.

Hi, On Apr 6, 12:19 am, Kevin Howerton wrote: > I only killed one hooker, but it was really small so I don't know if it > counts. Hmmm… > The problem with those patches though are that they don't appear > (correct me if i'm wrong) to account for handling different deletes > per reverse relation

Re: default delete() clear() behavior and you.

I only killed one hooker, but it was really small so I don't know if it counts. The problem with those patches though are that they don't appear (correct me if i'm wrong) to account for handling different deletes per reverse relation. You really need to have a more granular approach. If an objec

Re: default delete() clear() behavior and you.

Uhm, your fix fixes the problem at the wrong end. This can and should be supported by the database's native capabilities. This would be the ticket for it: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7539 But I like your imagination, or is there more truth behind your story than you'd admit? Cheers, Flor

Talk on django to an enterprise audience

Hi, I will be speaking about django "Building Reusable Applications using django" at the Great Indian Developer summit (link) in a couple of weeks. GIDS is a large conference, with lot of enterprise audience. To most of them, this will be an

default delete() clear() behavior and you.

Hi. So I came across a use-case for wanting to delete content (which django doesn't really handle exactly to my liking). I just got back from a vacation in vegas and noticed in a drunken stupor I had posted some pictures on my blog that should I really shouldn't have ( http://i.imgur.com/5oj15.jp

Re: GSOC proposal for "App loading"

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Dagvadorj Galbadrakh wrote: > I am planning to modify django.utils.importlib.py this way. Is it > agreeable? > > > On Apr 5, 11:11 am, Dagvadorj Galbadrakh wrote: >> Hello group, >> >> I want to attend to this year's Google Summer of Code program with >> "App load

Re: GSOC proposal for "App loading"

I am planning to modify django.utils.importlib.py this way. Is it agreeable? On Apr 5, 11:11 am, Dagvadorj Galbadrakh wrote: > Hello group, > > I want to attend to this year's Google Summer of Code program with > "App loading". The following is a part from my proposal. It offers > more simplisti

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

@Everyone who has commented here. I never intended to cause any animosity and I really appreciate everything that the core team does for us all. @Jacob I really do intend to write code. I make money doing non-Django development but I love Django so much that I spend 25+ hours a week not getting

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On ma, 2010-04-05 at 23:25 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > I'll freely admit that despite the major improvements landing in 1.2, > the development cycle itself hasn't been flawless. Hopefully I've been > able to provide some explanation for why things ended up the way they > did. You have, th

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote: > On ma, 2010-04-05 at 21:47 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > >> The bit that I have been engaging with is the discussion of (and >> apparent misconceptions around) Django's backwards compatibility >> policy, and our policies regarding

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote: > Not a criticism per se, but I am wondering why the next 1.1.x is > released alongside 1.2 instead of as a release on its own. I've yet > again seen a case of python 2.6.5 breaking django tests, so I would > welcome a new release of 1.1.x

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On ma, 2010-04-05 at 21:47 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > The bit that I have been engaging with is the discussion of (and > apparent misconceptions around) Django's backwards compatibility > policy, and our policies regarding support for older Python versions. And I appreciate that you have

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Apr 5, 2010, at 9:31 AM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > Without trying to defend anyone or anything here... Why ask other > developers to ignore an otherwise healthy discussion? > I believe Russ engaged in the discussion because he's interested; if > not in the idea, at least in discussing it. Not

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > Without trying to defend anyone or anything here... Why ask other > developers to ignore an otherwise healthy discussion? > I believe Russ engaged in the discussion because he's interested; if > not in the idea, at least in discussing it.

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

Without trying to defend anyone or anything here... Why ask other developers to ignore an otherwise healthy discussion? I believe Russ engaged in the discussion because he's interested; if not in the idea, at least in discussing it. Not everything has to be backed up with code... J. Leclanche / Ad

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:02 PM, orokusaki wrote: > This is a bit abstract, but I'd like to bring up this idea, [...] Well, I'm sorry, but I just don't have time to engage on big abstract discussions like this, so feel free to write whatever you want, but don't count on my participation. I'm also

GSOC proposal for "App loading"

Hello group, I want to attend to this year's Google Summer of Code program with "App loading". The following is a part from my proposal. It offers more simplistic approach than heavily discussed one with App() in INSTALLED_APPS, i.e., multiple instances of an app is declared as ('foo.polls', 'ma

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > The Right Solution for that is officially supporting Python 2.old in > Django 1.old, and eventually backporting minor features/fixes in > Django 1.old. The tradeoff here depends on what takes the most > development time: Backporting feature

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

The Right Solution for that is officially supporting Python 2.old in Django 1.old, and eventually backporting minor features/fixes in Django 1.old. The tradeoff here depends on what takes the most development time: Backporting features and fixes, or hacking compatibility with an old version of the

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > If you're going to use such an ancient version of a distribution, you > are only crippling yourself. As you said yourself, you should move on; > if someone is using Python 2.3, they can use Django 1.1/1.2. If they > want all-new 1.3 feature

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote: > On ma, 2010-04-05 at 14:37 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > >> For some perspective - even though Python 3.1 is out, dropping support >> for Python 2.3 in Django 1.2 is being greeted as controversial in some >> circles because RedHat E

Re: High Level Discussion about the Future of Django

If you're going to use such an ancient version of a distribution, you are only crippling yourself. As you said yourself, you should move on; if someone is using Python 2.3, they can use Django 1.1/1.2. If they want all-new 1.3 features, then updating Python/distro should not be a roadblock. This i