A little admin improvement for more grained permissions

2006-12-25 Thread msaelices
It's a common fact that admin interface is awesome, but if an user have edit permissions in that object class can edit all objects of this class. It obviously sucks. Ok, there is "row level permission" branch, but, generally we dont need all this stuff... it's more simple. Let's go to a example

Error at django Trac

2007-01-03 Thread msaelices
http://code.djangoproject.com/ is down. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this gr

Re: Call to Arms -- Caching Mechanisms

2007-09-15 Thread msaelices
Oh! beautiful code! could you paste Dependency model besides? On 15 sep, 03:41, "Honza Král" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > we use something likehttp://dpaste.com/19671/ > > it > - invalidates the cache when object is updated (based on registered test) > - can cooperate with apache active mq

Re: Call to Arms -- Caching Mechanisms

2007-09-16 Thread msaelices
Anybody has testing the performance of new improvements in session storage? In changeset http://code.djangoproject.com/changeset/6333 was implementing session backends for filesystem and memcached. This might improve performance of a site, freeing database for hard work. On 15 sep, 03:22, David C

Django is slower after changeset [6333]

2007-09-16 Thread msaelices
I created a ticket for it. Ticket is: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5513 After more than one hour of profiling, I found the problem. It creates a session for every request. I've attached patch on ticket: http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup_6364.diff Agai

Re: Django is slower after changeset [6333]

2007-09-16 Thread msaelices
This is the last patch update: http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup_6364.2.diff It improve performance a little, but It's difficult to test because differences are minimal. On 16 sep, 20:21, msaelices <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I created a

Re: Django is slower after changeset [6333]

2007-09-16 Thread msaelices
On 16 sep, 20:58, msaelices <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is the last patch update: > > http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup... Sorry, the correct link is this: http://code.djangoproject.com/attachment/ticket/5513/sessions_speedup_6364.

Re: Django is slower after changeset [6333]

2007-09-16 Thread msaelices
OK, after all, the main change it's already commited, and is the important one. On 17 sep, 01:24, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 11:21 -0700, msaelices wrote: > > I created a ticket for it. Ticket is: > >http://code.djangoproject.c

About convenience of caching contenttypes in generic relations

2007-09-21 Thread msaelices
I have uploaded a patch for improve generic relations performance: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5570 But mir closed my ticket because it think patch is not convenient. I think there are a lot of files with same type of caching. I don't use django cache framework. I use a simple dicti

Tutorial wiki broken: Failed to load TOC proccessor

2007-09-21 Thread msaelices
The problem is the [[TOC]] proccessor situated on top: http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Tutorials --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to dj

Re: About convenience of caching contenttypes in generic relations

2007-09-21 Thread msaelices
IL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, msaelices wrote: > > > I have uploaded a patch for improve generic relations performance: > > >http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5570 > > > But mir closed my ticket because it think patch is not convenient. > > >

Re: About convenience of caching contenttypes in generic relations

2007-09-21 Thread msaelices
On 22 sep, 03:21, Michael Radziej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, msaelices wrote: > > > You don't see well the code. > > Oh, you're right! > > I better stop triaging and go to bed now ;-) Good night. I do the same (It's 3:26AM) :-( >

Why not a django svn+trac for all django aplications

2007-10-12 Thread msaelices
Hi, I begin four years ago with a CMS called Plone [1]. It's based on Zope aplication server, and is great for functionality, and above all for number of aplications (products by plone) developed. Ok, Plone has many fails (i.e. Zope), and is a CMS (Django is a framework). When I meet django two y

Re: Better Support for static file serving via django

2007-12-12 Thread msaelices
On 12 dic, 01:30, "Mike Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey All, > > I've been looking at how to better serve my static files for django sites, > and I'm particularly interested in things like Javascript handling. > > For example if we were to look at RoR, they have their include tags which

About ModelForms implicitness and ways to wrap ModelForms

2008-04-02 Thread msaelices
This mail maybe can be splitted in two, but I write only one because both are related. Ok, ModelForms is a very very wonderful thing, but I want to talk about (maybe) excessive implicitness. Look at this form declaration: class AuthorForm(forms.Form): name = myforms.MyCharField(max_length=1

Re: About ModelForms implicitness and ways to wrap ModelForms

2008-04-03 Thread msaelices
On 4 abr, 00:28, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What about replacing the idea of a ModelForm with a ModelField? Then > for shorter > forms you could list all the fields explicitly, without having to > recode all the > default field definitions. I think should be hard to implemen