orget about it.
>
> Am Do., 22. Feb. 2024 um 01:59 Uhr schrieb Silvio :
>
>> Coming in again now that I've looked at upgrading.
>>
>> @Adam: your post was useful. But can you actually say you prefer the new
>> approach?
>>
>> But I'm going to b
Coming in again now that I've looked at upgrading.
@Adam: your post was useful. But can you actually say you prefer the new
approach?
But I'm going to be honest, this is a lot of hoops and gotchas. What did we
actually gain by deprecating this? I'm seeing maybe 15-20 lines of code
that will
That helps, thanks.
I don't think it's worth it either, because, ultimately, it'll still be
"wrong". The right __module__ is wherever you called modelform_factory from.
The perils of meta programming...
On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 11:33:50 AM UTC+2 j.bre...@netzkolchose.de
wrote:
> Looks to
ry in a plain Django installation: model passed to
modelform_factory and inspect the module name.
Best,
Silvio
--
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
Since these are PotsgreSQL-specific fields that are being deprecated, might
it make sense to provide a hint as to what the CreateCollation() call
should be?
I'm looking around and it's not immediately obvious. The CreateCollation()
examples in Django are for a German phone book, where in
And I remembered our
> conversation.
>
> Great job I read through the docs earlier. Very impressive. I dont work
> with Python at the moment so I can’t use it but I’m going to follow this
> project.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 16, 2022, at 7:11 PM, Silvio wrote:
&g
Check out my recently launched project as well: https://www.reactivated.io
Zero-configuration Django and React. Basically, you use React as a template
engine for Django.
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 12:25:31 PM UTC-4 Adam Johnson wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think you might enjoy reading up on htmx:
of it on the page.
Should we make it clearer?
Thank you all. Been using Django for 12 years and never been happier.
Best,
Silvio
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this grou
away the circular reference problem?
>
> Andrew
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2020, at 3:20 PM, Silvio J. Gutierrez wrote:
>
> 3 tests fail when I comment out the code, however, I suspect it's because
> of this:
>
> test_autodetector.py#586
>
> It's directly calling _detec
at 2:23 PM Adam Johnson wrote:
> Did you try deleting this code and seeing if any test failed?
>
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2020 at 17:54, Silvio wrote:
>
>> I've been digging around the 3.1 migration code just out of curiosity,
>> and I stumbled upon this in autodetector.py#772:
&g
operations for related fields are always adjacent
to the DeleteModel operation, so I cannot think of any case where
optimizer.py will *not* strip these out.
Am I missing something, or is this code that no longer contributes value?
Perhaps the optimizer has gotten better since?
Best,
Silvio
Essentially, I've ended up with the need for:
ComputedField
and
ComputedRelationship
where both have all of the niceties that regular fields and foreign
relationships have.
So I'd love to see this in Django.
-
Silvio
On Sunday, September 2, 2018 at 10:55:58 PM UTC-4, Alex Hill wrote:
>
&
I implemented this feature by having a default manager that overrides
get_queryset. it loops over any calculated field declared on the model and
annotates that model. Always.
The main issue I ran into is that these fields were not query-able when
used for related lookups.
So:
I've had this situation come up too. It would indeed be very useful.
Django South had something vaguely related:
http://south.readthedocs.org/en/latest/tutorial/part3.html
However, the command did not make it over to built-in migrations.
On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 8:44:37 AM UTC-5, Shai
I feel inclined to mention the tool I built:
https://www.sgawebsites.com/projects/django-aggregator/ . Very easy to
use, and easy to deploy.
-
Silvio
On Aug 9, 1:44 am, Alexander Schepanovski <suor@gmail.com> wrote:
> I prefer webassets. You may also look into.
--
You received thi
suggest you work with 1.3 if at all possible.
Silvio
On Jun 27, 11:54 am, spencer cole <spencer.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Howdy. I'm a new developer for Django. My work is starting work using
> Django 1.3, and I find I really like it as far as I've used it so far.
> My web hosting
else block[1], but I found
it a bit unclear that any and all exceptions need to be caught, the
transaction rolled back, and the exception raised again.
Let me know your thoughts. As always, thanks a lot for the hard work.
Just tried class-based views in 1.3, and they're awesome.
Silvio
[1]
http://do
which file
the tests belong. I'd appreciate any pointers.
Thanks,
Silvio
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, s
Great idea, I'd like to see this implemented too.
Running a memcached instance for small sites seems like overkill.
I'm willing to help write whatever code is necessary.
Silvio
On May 24, 4:21 am, Julien Phalip <jpha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Several people have exp
Owen,
The file is only created once, so the compression only happens once.
Only when any of the files being aggregated is changed does the file
get recreated.
In other words, the process is automatic, but it has no performance
penalty.
Silvio
On Apr 30, 10:27 am, Owen Nelson <onel...@gmail.
not an asset manager
though; I've yet to see or come up with a great solution.
Regards,
Silvio
On Apr 23, 10:51 am, Owen Nelson <onel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin Howerton wrote:
> > The widget and admin media system needs to be re-evaluated IMO
> > none of these solutions
21 matches
Mail list logo
