Great. Thanks Jon. I will follow up there next week.
On Saturday, 11 February 2023, Jon Janzen wrote:
> Hey Carlton,
>
> Sorry I skipped over the suggestion in one of your earlier messages to
> post on the Forum.
>
> I’ve done so now: https://forum.djangoproject.com/t/
> asyncifying-django-contr
Hey Carlton,
Sorry I skipped over the suggestion in one of your earlier messages to post on
the Forum.
I’ve done so now:
https://forum.djangoproject.com/t/asyncifying-django-contrib-auth-and-signals-and-maybe-sessions/18770
I think we can consider this thread deprecated in favor of the above F
No plan ever survives first contact with the enemy :) but, this seems
reasonable to me Jon, yes.
Can I suggest we move further discussion on details to the Forum's async
category? It's nicer, better contained, and we more likely to catch
interested eyes.
Thanks for pursuing this! 🎁
On Thu, 9 Feb
Hey Carlton,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, a few things come to mind:
A. It sounds like we’re in agreement about the utility and severability of
Phase 1 (just creating an async_to_sync-based wrapper around the auth
interface). I want to make sure I don’t cause extra work on the bug trac
Hi Jon.
Thanks for this.
I think your use-case is reasonable, and that you're basically on the
right track.
If you were to add test cases to your PoC, there's certainly a case for
looking seriously at it.
It should be reasonable to keep pushing the interfaces down one layer at a
time. (See commen
Hey,
Sorry about the delay in my response, holidays came early and stayed late for
me this year.
> TBH I'd prefer it if you pondered the design here without opening a ticket
> until such a point (if ever) that you have a concrete plan. (We'd likely just
> close it as wontfix unless there's a s
> But I can file a ticket just to track this one?
TBH I'd prefer it if you pondered the design here without opening a ticket
until such a point (if ever) that you have a concrete plan. (We'd likely
just close it as wontfix unless there's a specific idea on the table
anyway, so it's just noise at t
Hey Carlton,
There's: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/31949 "Allow builtin view
> decorators to be applied directly to async views."
> I think this is likely the next step.
>
> There's a PR for that, which I think took a too complex approach (see
> discussion). A simpler (more inline) take b
Hi Jon.
There's: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/31949 "Allow builtin view
decorators to be applied directly to async views."
I think this is likely the next step.
There's a PR for that, which I think took a too complex approach (see
discussion). A simpler (more inline) take be good to see.
Hey everyone,
Sorry if I'm not following correct protocol on this or if this has already
been discussed elsewhere, but is there any consensus about (or needed for)
creating async versions of contrib packages?
My personal interest in this is about django.contrib.auth (login,
authenticate, etc.)
10 matches
Mail list logo
