Re: I would like to discuss my proposal for a working way to call .add() on an m2m with through= model

Here's a little bit more historical discussion on the topic: *https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/uWe31AjzZX0/discussion * On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 at 05:57 Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at

Re: Adding generated common table expressions

Here's the code changes I've made, noting that some of them were to shove in a generalised VALUES clause that mocks being a queryset, so that it plays with the same interface. https://github.com/django/django/compare/master...ashleywaite:cte-dev#files_bucket I've had a glance at cte-trees/cte-f

Re: Adding generated common table expressions

CTE Forest is a specific use case of CTEs to store self-referential tree data sets. It's quite a different use to what I'm proposing, though its implementation might become simpler if Django is generally CTE aware. - Ashley On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 6:59:57 PM UTC+11, Matthias Kestenholz

Re: Adding generated common table expressions

I'm nesting the query generators as they currently exist and adding awareness of that nesting into another compiler, so that queries that reference other models, contain annotations, etc should still in theory work fine. I do agree that the best method would be to generalise this to incorporate

Django 1.11 release candidate 1 released

We've made the final (hopefully) release on the way to Django's next major release, Django 1.11! Check out the blog post: https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2017/mar/21/django-111-rc-1-released/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers

Re: To keep or not to keep: logging of undefined template variables

My general policy is that warnings should only be logged if there is a good way to silence them. A good way means: 1) fix the bug which is causing them (only applies if there is genuinely a bug or bad practice that should be fixed) 2) disable the warning in a fine tuned way i.e. you can indic

Re: I would like to discuss my proposal for a working way to call .add() on an m2m with through= model

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Adam Johnson wrote: > It does seem like a somewhat arbitrary historical restriction. Collin's > PoC change is surprisingly small and simple. > > Seems like it would be fine if Django allowed add() and let any errors >> about missing data bubble-up. >> > As the per

Re: HMVC implementation on django

Hi, This question should be posted in django-users mailing list, as this list is for discussing about django internals. Anyway, you could read the answer here http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31914098/djangos-equivalent-of-php-codeigniters-hmvc Thanks On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 7:20:58 P

HMVC implementation on django

Can django be like HMVC framework? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegr

Re: Any interest in integrating Django Admin Sortable into core?

Morning Adam, I can certainly refactor jQuery-UI out of this code. Aside from performance improvements, the core of django-admin-sortable has remained almost the same for about 5 years - or longer... I can't even remember when I created it - I'm getting old! Let me see what I can do in that re

Re: Any interest in integrating Django Admin Sortable into core?

Hi Brandon, Thanks for offering to contribute. I'm not particularly familiar with the admin but from a quick look I see django-admin-sortable uses jQuery UI to support its functionality, whilst contrib.admin doesn't use it. I don't think there's a strict policy on whether new JS libraries should