Re: How to let users to block private messages in Django-postman?

This mailing list is for the development of Django itself. Please write to django-users for usage questions. On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 7:24:11 PM UTC-5, Lukas wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have instlled django-postman but it works great. However I'd like to > allow users to opt for not receiv

How to let users to block private messages in Django-postman?

Hi all, I have instlled django-postman but it works great. However I'd like to allow users to opt for not receiving any private messages. I'm wondering how the easiest way to do so? I've looked at the docs but could not fin

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

On 11/02/16 20:11, Andy Baker wrote: > As customisable as it can be, I find the problem to be it is a data-centric view of your system, closely tied to the database models. You're correct that a truly 'task-centric' UI would be a lot of effort - but really - how common are such interfaces in

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

FWIW, we used to tell clients that Django offers a basic admin interface "for free". However, we NEVER had a client that was sufficiently familiar with what a database is or how data modeling works for this to ever suffice. The first thing we always do on new project is immediately disable the

Re: [Review Request] Added support for database delegated fields (like AutoField)

Hi Anssi, On 02/11/2016 02:51 AM, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > I created a proof-of-concept pull request for improved deferred fields > loading. See https://github.com/django/django/pull/6118. In short, it is > faster and cleaner (no more dynamically created subclasses for deferred > loading!) than t

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

While I think it's true that a process centric workflow (wizards, or hubs anyone?) would be incredibly useful, that does not take away from the fact that the model centric admins are also incredibly useful, and time saving. It's so easy to add search, sorting, bulk actions, etc to an admin--the

Re: [Review Request] Added support for database delegated fields (like AutoField)

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 1:41:44 PM UTC+1, Florian Apolloner wrote: > > * Unless I miss something, YourModel.__init__ is Model.__init__ if the > user didn't change it -> pass is DEFERRED > Sadly this is not true, you can check if __init__ is in dict though… -- You received this mess

Re: [Review Request] Added support for database delegated fields (like AutoField)

Oh, I somewhat missread and though there would be a new DEFERRED argument, the backwards issue is easy enough though: * Unless I miss something, YourModel.__init__ is Model.__init__ if the user didn't change it -> pass is DEFERRED * If the user changed it check for model._meta.new_style_deferr

Re: [Review Request] Added support for database delegated fields (like AutoField)

On Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 10:51:59 AM UTC+1, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > > Before doing any further work on this we should decide if the > Model.__init__() problem is bad enough to stop this cleanup, and if so, do > anybody have any ideas of how to avoid the problem? > I do not think Mod

Re: [Review Request] Added support for database delegated fields (like AutoField)

On Wednesday, February 3, 2016 at 8:47:16 AM UTC+2, Anssi Kääriäinen wrote: > For the update_fields change, I think we can do that completely > separately. The same goes for changing the way how deferred fields are > implemented. > I created a proof-of-concept pull request for improved deferred

Re: thinking about the admin's scope and its description in the docs

> As customisable as it can be, I find the problem to be it is a data-centric view of your system, closely tied to the database models. You're correct that a truly 'task-centric' UI would be a lot of effort - but really - how common are such interfaces in their fullest sense? In reality nearly

Re: Logged out sessions are resurrected by concurrent requests (ticket 21608)

Thanks for all the help with the patch! I hope its close to being acceptable now. Can someone have a look at the PR? Den tisdag 2 februari 2016 kl. 13:08:51 UTC+1 skrev Tore Lundqvist: > > Ok, got that sorted now. How about the fix, is it reasonable? > > > Den tisdag 2 februari 2016 kl. 11:51:19

Re: [Question] MySQL Microseconds stripping

I've released the forementioned command as part of Django-MySQL, see here: https://django-mysql.readthedocs.org/en/latest/management_commands/fix_datetime_columns.html On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 1:03:42 PM UTC, Adam Johnson wrote: > > Hi, > > I've just finished converting all the datetime col