Re: Ticket 15754 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15754

On Monday, August 6, 2012 4:49:12 PM UTC+2, Marcob wrote: > > I'd really like to see it in Django 1.5 trunk, and it looks like the only > blocking reason are missing tests. > Wow, thanks a lot Alex Gaynor! :-) https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15754#comment:7 Ciao. Marco. --

Ticket 15754 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15754

In previous Django major releases I used to apply lots of patches (and suffer some major headaches :-). After 1.4 only this little one-liner is left: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15754 Leaving it out is impossible for me, as the user experience with some custom forms can be painfully

Ticket 16317 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/16317

The ticket 16317 has a very nice 4 months old patch (it's has a two lines fix, remainder are just test fixes). It was marked for 1.3 version but now it's better to change it to 1.4 version. As I really hate to patch django I think my only solution is "to lobby" this ticket here :-) Is there

Re: Django 1.4 roadmap

On Nov 28, 9:33 pm, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:40 AM, Russell Keith-Magee > > wrote: > > So -- what we need is for someone in the core team who is able to find > > the resources in their schedule to commit to shepherding a

Re: Django 1.4 roadmap

On Nov 26, 1:19 pm, Aymeric Augustin <aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > On 24 nov. 2011, at 16:53, Marcob wrote: > > > I realize that this is a volunteer-based project, but I was wondering > > if you have any updates regarding the wiki page for the

Django 1.4 roadmap

Dear Django Core Developers, first and foremost, thank you for Django, which is a wonderful project. I realize that this is a volunteer-based project, but I was wondering if you have any updates regarding the wiki page for the 1.4 roadmap? (https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Version1.4Roadmap)

Re: Kilobyte or Kibibite

On 12 Gen, 14:26, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > You won't see me disagreeing. +1 to keeping as is. > Until I start seeing kibibyte being used in the New York Times, or the > prefered usage in the Chicago Manual of Style, the kibibyte is little > more to me than an

Re: rethinking raw_id_fields

On 4 Ott, 04:09, Chuck Harmston wrote: > An Ajax admin solution (of the autocomplete sort, which I presume is what > you're proposing) does not have the same use case for raw_id_fields. It's > based on the assumption that the user knows the value of the unicode >

#6903 -- Go back to old change_list view after hitting save

I think that #6903 ticket http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6903 (together with http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/12241) should be considered to be in 1.3 release. Every single person I know that use admin without this patch asks for this functionality. On 3/23/2009 Jacob said: This has gone

Re: rethinking raw_id_fields

On 30 Set, 07:34, "subs...@gmail.com" wrote: > Hello all, > I was browsing the tickets and saw a few of them nagging about some > restrictions to raw_id_fields. Since my first Django installation, a couple of years ago, I fixed and used this patch:

How to "lobby" for a ticket to be in 1.3?

I see a huge list of tickets that shoud be in 1.3 release: http://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=new=assigned=reopened=1.3 Within them I didn't found some that are, imho, a must for every Django installation I did in the last two years: Better raw_id_fields feedback in newform-admins branc

Re: Admin sloooow with postgresql and a 160k record table

On 27 Mag, 22:58, Alex Gaynor wrote: > FWIW Jacob was wrong, there is another tiket, but I can't find out now > (yay trac search ;)), so don't be offended if I close your ticket. Alex, no offense at all :-) Ah, you don't be offended but I already closed it as a dupe of

Re: Admin sloooow with postgresql and a 160k record table

On May 27, 11:13 pm, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > I thought there was already a ticket open for this, but I can't seem > to find one. Can you open a ticket so that we don't forget? To posterity: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/13643 :-) Ciao. Marco. -- You received

Re: Admin sloooow with postgresql and a 160k record table

On 27 Mag, 23:13, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > I thought there was already a ticket open for this, but I can't seem > to find one. Can you open a ticket so that we don't forget? Sure. Meanwhile I solved my problem with LazyPaginator and a bit of monkey patching. I'll post my

Admin sloooow with postgresql and a 160k record table

With postgresql count(*) is a slow operation because it forces a full table scan: http://groups.google.it/group/pgsql.performance/browse_thread/thread/6f94b296019a0e1e/d2d6ca3018f51cb3?hl=it=UTF-8=postgresql+django+slow+count%28*%29#d2d6ca3018f51cb3 I've a table with only 160.000 records (but a

Does Python 2.6.5 broke Django 1.1.1 Client Test?

It's about 4 hours I'm trying to find the real culprit... To narrow the problem I create the simplest admin test: from django.test import TestCase class AdminViewBasicTest(TestCase): def testAdmin(self): from django.contrib.auth.models import User user =

Re: generic_hierarchy proposal

On 16 Ott, 15:08, Marcob <marcob...@gmail.com> wrote: > P.S. Perhaps you can already obtain this with a custom changelist_form > and a custom date_hierarchy block, moreover I'd like to have a proper > option. Obviuosly instead of changelist_form I meaned change_list_templat

generic_hierarchy proposal

Often I got this remark about date_hierarchy "Wonderful! May we have this also with this hierarchical field on that table?". And my answer is invariably: "Unfortunately no: it works only with date and/or time field". I would like a generic_hierarchy option in admin where you can insert every

Admin: TemplateSyntax error if I input a manual (and not existent) value in a FK in raw_id_fields

I saw these tickets: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9484 (closed: duplicate) Admin, raw_id_fields, not int value Msg: #8746 covers this. http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8746 (closed: fixed) Data entered in raw_id_fields needs better checking Msg: Please file a new ticket for this

Re: Strange behaviour with exclude / filter and a nullable FK

On Sep 15, 8:05 pm, Alex Gaynor wrote: > This has already been filed as a bug in Django's ticket > tracker:http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/10790.  In the future please try > searching the tracker before filing a bug. Thanks Alex, but: 1) I searched the trac 2) I

Re: Strange behaviour with exclude / filter and a nullable FK

On 15 Set, 19:32, Marcob <marcob...@gmail.com> wrote: >     LEFT OUTER JOIN "auth_user" ON ("ticket_ticket"."assigned_id" = I translated from italian, obviously assigned_id should be assigned_to_id. Sorry. Ciao. Marco. --~--~-~--~~---

Can't use partial date format in settings.py

Reading the following documentation I deduced that partial date settings (used in date_hierarchy filter) could be set in settings.py: http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/settings/#year-month-format http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/settings/#month-day-format Unfortunately the

Strange behaviour with exclude / filter and a nullable FK

I have a model with a FK on User table: from django.contrib.auth.models import User class Ticket(models.Model): assigned_to = models.ForeignKey(User, null=True, blank=True) ... Then I have these two querysets: >>> q1 = Ticket.objects.filter(assigned_to__isnull=True)

Queryset-refactor merge in newforms-admin branch broke date_hierarchy filter

I found that after queryset-merge in newforms-admin date_hierarchy filter doesn't work anymore: years and month are repeated. To fix it I wrote this quick hack in django/contrib/admin/templatetags/ admin_list.py: Line 240: -days = cl.query_set.filter(**{year_field: year_lookup,

Re: Some of newforms-admin branch files have DOS mode line endings!!!

On 19 Apr, 13:37, Marcob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just exported newforms-admin branch e try to apply this > patchhttp://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7028 > It fails on django/contrib/admin/templatetags/admin_list.py because it > is in DOS mode!!! > Why on

Some of newforms-admin branch files have DOS mode line endings!!!

I just exported newforms-admin branch e try to apply this patch http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7028 It fails on django/contrib/admin/templatetags/admin_list.py because it is in DOS mode!!! Why on earth? Ciao. Marco. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this

Re: Better raw-id-fields user feedback (newforms-admin branch)

On 16 Apr, 02:24, Marcob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7028 I just modifed this patch and added a new one for django test suite (one liner!): - improved-raw-id-admin-feedback-fixed-regression-test.diff (3.7 kB) - tests-fix-for-improved-raw-id-admin-pa

Better raw-id-fields user feedback (newforms-admin branch)

http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/7028 This little patch improves a lot the user feedback experience during raw-id-fields selection. When a big table hasn't a clear id (for example just a numeric id) and an user chooses an item from the popup window, the item description appears only after