Re: The unsettings project

On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 8:33:09 AM UTC+1, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > > On 11 févr. 2014, at 03:27, James Farrington > > wrote: > > If you haven't heard about unsettings, it is an attempt to move away from > using the settings global. There was a discussion at

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

On 11 févr. 2014, at 03:00, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > I'd be able to mount a reasonable argument that {{ field(size=30) }} is a > problem, not a feature (whats the magical significance of 30? What happens if > you make a site-wide decision to extend all size=30

Re: The unsettings project

On 11 févr. 2014, at 03:27, James Farrington wrote: > If you haven't heard about unsettings, it is an attempt to move away from > using the settings global. There was a discussion at djangocon (which I > wasn't there for, but I was told about it) which led to some

Re: The unsettings project

Diff https://github.com/SlashRoot/django/compare/django:master...master On Monday, February 10, 2014 6:59:41 PM UTC-8, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:27 AM, James Farrington > > wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> Here are some thoughts on the

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

Sent from my iPad > On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:00 PM, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > > >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: >>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: >>> >>> It's a problem that we

Re: The unsettings project

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:27 AM, James Farrington < jamestfarring...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Here are some thoughts on the unsettings issue. If you haven't heard about > unsettings, it is an attempt to move away from using the settings global. > There was a discussion at

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: > > It's a problem that we are unable to do things > that would otherwise be no-brainers (e.g. rendering form widgets using > templates rather than by

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

On 11 February 2014 12:31, Luke Sneeringer wrote: > On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: > > It's a problem that we are unable to do things > that would otherwise be no-brainers (e.g. rendering form widgets using > templates rather than by

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

> On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: > > It's a problem that we are unable to do things > that would otherwise be no-brainers (e.g. rendering form widgets using > templates rather than by concatenating strings of HTML in Python code) > because our default

Re: ImportError: cannot import name actions

Got this while tried to laucnh Djangos test suite on fb1e3435a4d7e0265f19a1a9f130c9485fb8dfe9 On Tuesday, October 15, 2013 4:56:56 PM UTC+4, rok wrote: > > I have recently been testing the 1.6b4 tag with a new app we are writing, > using apache and wsgi. However, I could not get rid of the

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

On 10 févr. 2014, at 20:16, Carl Meyer wrote: > I've proposed it before, and not in jest. Though perhaps not fully > seriously either, as full seriousness would mean supplying a patch. I've heard an ex-BDFL accepting the idea. The other ex-BDFL was there and he didn't throw

Re: Django 1.7 data migrations?

Andrew Godwin writes: > Hi Kent, > > The documentation is not yet complete, hence your confusion. There is > indeed provision for data migrations in the new system, with an > operation called RunPython - I'll see if I can get documentation up > for it this week. OK,

Re: Django 1.7 data migrations?

Hi Kent, The documentation is not yet complete, hence your confusion. There is indeed provision for data migrations in the new system, with an operation called RunPython - I'll see if I can get documentation up for it this week. Andrew On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Kent Engström

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

Hi Chris and Russ, On 02/08/2014 05:11 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Christopher Medrela > > wrote: > > Why not switching to Jinja2? I thought that somebody else proposed > this idea > but

Django 1.7 data migrations?

I just had a look at the Django 1.7 migrations docs at https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/topics/migrations/ In South, I've learned to use schema migrations and data migrations together, for situations like when you need to combine two fields, or split them (schema migration to add new fields,

Re: [GSoC] Switching to Jinja2 proposal

For any refactoring of the template engine, going to jinja2, etc... it would very much help to look at this ticket first: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20434 It's a backwards compatible patch, which allows template tags to be written in a much more declarative way, without exposing any