Django 1.1.1's Feed only display the latest item

2010-08-10 Thread phretor
Hello, I've created a Feed subclass to export a simple feed of news http://paste.pocoo.org/show/248193/. As you can see (L45-46), the Feed subclass' items() method returns the first 15 objects in News.objects.order_by('-time'): def items(self): return News.objects.order_by('-time')

Re: Django 1.1.1's Feed only display the latest item

2010-08-10 Thread Tomi Pieviläinen
As mentioned in the IRC channel, the feed did indeed display two items, but because it was invalid markup (based on W3) Safari didn't show them properly. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django

Re: Django 1.1.1's Feed only display the latest item

2010-08-10 Thread Federico Maggi
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:47, Tomi Pieviläinen wrote: > As mentioned in the IRC channel, the feed did indeed display two > items, but because it was invalid markup (based on W3) Safari didn't > show them properly. I noticed, but has this issue (i.e., invalid RSS markup) been fixed in 1.2 or

Re: Django 1.1.1's Feed only display the latest item

2010-08-10 Thread Daniel Roseman
On Aug 10, 9:04 am, Federico Maggi wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 09:47, Tomi Pieviläinen wrote: > > As mentioned in the IRC channel, the feed did indeed display two > > items, but because it was invalid markup (based on W3) Safari didn't > > show them properly. > >     I noticed, but has this

Re: Django 1.1.1's Feed only display the latest item

2010-08-10 Thread Federico Maggi
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 13:38, Daniel Roseman wrote: > This was actually an issue with the OP's get_absolute_url method, > which has been diagnosed on StackOverflow. could you please be more specific (e.g., a URL would be useful). Thanks! -- Fede -- You received this message because you ar

Re: Django 1.1.1's Feed only display the latest item

2010-08-10 Thread Daniel Roseman
On Aug 10, 1:35 pm, Federico Maggi wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 13:38, Daniel Roseman wrote: > > This was actually an issue with the OP's get_absolute_url method, > > which has been diagnosed on StackOverflow. > >     could you please be more specific (e.g., a URL would be useful). > > Thanks