Cool, PR here: https://github.com/django/django/pull/12479
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 1:59 AM Adam Johnson wrote:
> I guess it's not a very big change so could be worth it to increase
> readability.
>
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 16:12, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
>> In any case, i
-way function that hashes data, a password or passphrase. Salts are
>> used to safeguard passwords in storage.
>
>
> Ram is right - this variable is not a salt in that definition. We aren't
> using a one-way hash function, but a reversible rotational cipher function.
> The &
far as I know this
wouldn't affect functionality at all, because the term "salt" doesn't
appear in actual tokens.
What do you think?
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)&quo
FYI: I opened a thread on Python-ideas where we continued the discussion on
my `raise as` proposal, Shai's proposal, etc.:
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-id...@python.org/thread/KM7NRNFZHALOBKJUXVYQL2SLDP3MAANW/
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:16 PM Ram Rachum wrote:
>
>
>
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:23 PM Carlton Gibson
wrote:
> > I'm basing it on the fact that Carlton approved this PR for the style
> guide: https://github.com/django/django/pull/12350
>
> No. I don't think we should merge that change. (It's "approved" qua itself
> before reviewing, and dependent on
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:27 AM Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> Hello Ram,
>
> On 6 Feb 2020, at 19:08, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
> In other words, "raise from" is the inevitable future, it's just that
> we're not in a rush t
habits, the best we
could hope is to move it forward at a glacial pace-- A situation somewhat
similar to the move to Python 3. If Django were to adopt this practice, it
would help in getting other projects to do that too, and for people to pay
attention to that line of text.
Thanks,
Ram.
On Thu
I made a pull request for the style guide if anyone would like to review:
https://github.com/django/django/pull/12350
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 6:05 PM Ram Rachum wrote:
> Jon: That's awesome! I also liked R101. I didn't think of that.
>
> Adam: I thought so too, but after g
Jon: That's awesome! I also liked R101. I didn't think of that.
Adam: I thought so too, but after going over dozens of R100 cases, I didn't
find even one where a raise without "from" inside an except clause was
justified. I challenge you to show me even one such example.
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 1
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 5:05 PM Shai Berger wrote:
> [snip]
But as it turns out, `from` puts the
> original exception on the `__cause__` in *addition* to `__context__`:
>
> [snip]
> So that is not a concern.
>
Awesome! I did not know that.
> > Regarding automatically enforcing this format go
worry about the other 10%.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 2:37 PM אורי wrote:
> Ram,
>
> I noticed that 100 files changed in this commit. Did you edit each file
> manually before you committed, or was it some script doing it for you?
>
> If it was a script or program, can I see it?
lightly annoying when
>> displayed via console output, as you see the inner exception first and have
>> to scroll up to see the exception you actually have to handle.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> On 18 Jan 2020, at 09:55, Ram Rachum wrote:
>>
>>
>>
ommit by Thomas Allison:
https://github.com/django/django/commit/3e8b7333904f1ab6aa18eeb508659256f3644816
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ram.
--
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
d
> hasher...
>
Yep, that's true.
>
> --
> C
>
>
> On 9 June 2015 at 16:01, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
>> If the leak happened because someone got into your code repo, you're
>> right. (I can't rule out a scenario where someone got your SECRET_KEY w
are with the current
implementation. So isn't this an improvement?
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Shai Berger wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 June 2015 08:23:03 Ram Rachum wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Curtis Maloney <
> cur...@acommoncreative.com>
> > wrote:
>
Curtis
>
>
> On 9 June 2015 at 15:16, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> What do you think about using the project's `SECRET_KEY` as an additional
>> salt in Django's password hashers? The advantage would be that they'll be
>> harder to crack,
I can think of is
that you couldn't change your `SECRET_KEY` without breaking old passwords
(so maybe we need a separate secret in the settings.)
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers
a
> QuerySet :)
>
> --
> Curtis
>
> On 27 May 2015 at 07:14, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
>> I found the cause of my problem: `django.db.models.Manager.from_queryset`
>> copies all the methods from the `QuerySet` class to the `Manager` class,
>> but it doesn't copy the proper
over properties as
well?
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 10:19:25 PM UTC+3, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Accessing properties in templates should work as far as I know. Maybe
> there is an error in your application.
>
> On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 2:27:40 PM UTC-4, Ram Rachum wrote:
>>
>&g
guage/#variables
It indeed doesn't mention properties.
Why should properties not work through template? I can't think of a good
reason.
Thanks,
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)&qu
his possible to do with Django?*
Thanks for your help,
Ram Rachum.
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Michael Manfre wrote:
> Stored procedures, at least with MSSQL, provide another way of returning
> multiple result sets with a single SQL statement. The queries will be
> parsed and execute
ple select statements can be sent over that single
> connection though, which is the closest you're going to get.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Friday, 27 February 2015 23:14:05 UTC+11, Ram Rachum wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> After asking this question on django-user
e database.
Am I right that Django doesn't currently let you do that? Do you think it's
possible to make Django do that?
Thanks,
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
T
Hi everybody,
I've submitted the patch, and corrected it, and it's been sitting on the
issue tracker for 2 weeks without anyone commenting. Does anyone care to
discuss this? I want to have this merged in, or discuss any problems in
merging it in.
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:27 PM,
Submitted patch:
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/21105#comment:1
On Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:09:55 PM UTC+3, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 15, 2013, at 2:59 PM, Florian Apolloner
> >
> wrote:
>
> Hi Ram,
>
> On Sunday, September 15, 2013 12:34
orian Apolloner wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sunday, September 15, 2013 11:45:29 AM UTC+2, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
>> What if instead of calculating the PBKDF2 hash of the password, we'll
>> calculate the PBKDF2 hash of its SHA1 hash? Then the time of checking
>> passwords would
f "side channel attach"... worth reading up on if you
> want to get further into crypto:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_channel_attack
>
> --
> Curtis
>
>
>
> On 15 September 2013 19:00, Ram Rachum >wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I just saw the new re
passwords, thereby
defending against dos attacks, while atthe same time not letting an attacker
who obtained the hashes to get the passwords?
I'm not a security expert, just brainstorming.
Thanks,
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Djan
Wonderful, thank you!
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> On 18 mars 2013, at 21:51, Ram Rachum wrote:
>
> > Why does Django switch to the new hasher only if the algorithm was
> changed, and not if the number
Look at this code:
https://github.com/django/django/blob/master/django/contrib/auth/hashers.py#L55
Why does Django switch to the new hasher only if the algorithm was changed,
and not if the number of iterations (which could be critical) changed?
Thanks,
Ram.
--
You received this message
e you don't want to access the data."
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Ram Rachum wrote:
> > I suggest copying your explanation into the documentation.
>
> it's already there:
>
> " This me
Thanks Carl!
I suggest copying your explanation into the documentation.
Thanks,
Ram.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Carl Meyer wrote:
> Hi Ram,
>
> On 01/18/2013 06:25 AM, Ram Rachum wrote:
> > Can someone who's familiar with Django internals please confirm or de
Can someone who's familiar with Django internals please confirm or deny the
following answer to my question?
http://stackoverflow.com/a/14369747/76701
Thanks,
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To view
In which Django release are we hoping to release this port? 1.4 or 1.5?
Ram.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/Y8-2tS
Hello everyone i am new to python and Django learning it for college
project in which i want to save image in postgreSQL database which i
am sending from my URL, please help me with that i will be thankful to
all of you
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
35 matches
Mail list logo
