Search Results

Search found 26207 results on 1049 pages for 'django users'.

Page 30/1049 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • Django forms: how to dynamically create ModelChoiceField labels

    - by Henri
    I would like to create dynamic labels for a forms.ModelChoiceField and I'm wondering how to do that. I have the following form class: class ProfileForm(forms.ModelForm): def __init__(self, data=None, ..., language_code='en', family_name_label='Family name', horoscope_label='Horoscope type', *args, **kwargs): super(ProfileForm, self).__init__(data, *args, **kwargs) self.fields['family_name'].label = family_name_label . . self.fields['horoscope'].label = horoscope_label self.fields['horoscope'].queryset = Horoscope.objects.all() class Meta: model = Profile family_name = forms.CharField(widget=forms.TextInput(attrs={'size':'80', 'class': 'contact_form'})) . . horoscope = forms.ModelChoiceField(queryset = Horoscope.objects.none(), widget=forms.RadioSelect(), empty_label=None) The default labels are defined by the unicode function specified in the Profile definition. However the labels for the radio buttons created by the ModelChoiceField need to be created dynamically. First I thought I could simply override ModelChoiceField as described in the Django documentation. But that creates static labels. It allows you to define any label but once the choice is made, that choice is fixed. So I think I need to adapt add something to init like: class ProfileForm(forms.ModelForm): def __init__(self, data=None, ..., language_code='en', family_name_label='Family name', horoscope_label='Horoscope type', *args, **kwargs): super(ProfileForm, self).__init__(data, *args, **kwargs) self.fields['family_name'].label = family_name_label . . self.fields['horoscope'].label = horoscope_label self.fields['horoscope'].queryset = Horoscope.objects.all() self.fields['horoscope'].<WHAT>??? = ??? Anyone having any idea how to handle this? Any help would be appreciated very much.

    Read the article

  • Django Template For Loop Removing <img> Self-Closing

    - by Zack
    Django's for loop seems to be removing all of my <img> tag's self-closing...ness (/>). In the Template, I have this code: {% for item in item_list %} <li> <a class="left" href="{{ item.url }}">{{ item.name }}</a> <a class="right" href="{{ item.url }}"> <img src="{{ item.icon.url }}" alt="{{ item.name }} Logo." /> </a> </li> {% endfor %} It outputs this: <li> <a class="left" href="/some-url/">This is an item</a> <a class="right" href="/some-url/"> <img src="/media/img/some-item.jpg" alt="This is an item Logo."> </a> </li> As you can see, the <img> tag is no longer closed, and thus the page doesn't validate. This isn't a huge issue since it'll still render properly in all browsers, but I'd like to know how to solve it. I've tried wrapping the whole for loop in {% autoescape off %}...{% endautoescape %} but that didn't change anything. All other self-closed <img> tags in the document outside the for loop still properly close.

    Read the article

  • Custom Django Field is deciding to work as ForiegnKey for no reason

    - by Joe Simpson
    Hi, i'm making a custom field in Django. There's a problem while trying to save it, it's supposed to save values like this 'user 5' and 'status 9' but instead in the database these fields show up as just the number. Here is the code for the field: def find_key(dic, val): return [k for k, v in dic.items() if v == val][0] class ConnectionField(models.TextField): __metaclass__ = models.SubfieldBase serialize = False description = 'Provides a connection for an object like User, Page, Group etc.' def to_python(self, value): if type(value) != unicode: return value value = value.split(" ") if value[0] == "user": return User.objects.get(pk=value[1]) else: from social.models import connections return get_object_or_404(connections[value[0]], pk=value[1]) def get_prep_value(self, value): from social.models import connections print value, "prep" if type(value) == User: return "user %s" % str(value.pk) elif type(value) in connections.values(): o= "%s %s" % (find_key(connections, type(value)), str(value.pk)) print o, "return" return o else: print "CONNECTION ERROR!" raise TypeError("Value is not connectable!") Connection is just a dictionary with the "status" text linked up to the model for a StatusUpdate. I'm saving a model like this which is causing the issue: Relationship.objects.get_or_create(type="feedback",from_user=request.user,to_user=item) Please can someone help, Many Thanks Joe *_*

    Read the article

  • Suggestions for a django db structure

    - by rh0dium
    Hi Say I have the unknown number of questions. For example: Is the sky blue [y/n] What date were your born on [date] What is pi [3.14] What is a large integ [100] Now each of these questions poses a different but very type specific answer (boolean, date, float, int). Natively django can happily deal with these in a model. class SkyModel(models.Model): question = models.CharField("Is the sky blue") answer = models.BooleanField(default=False) class BirthModel(models.Model): question = models.CharField("What date were your born on") answer = models.DateTimeField(default=today) class PiModel(models.Model) question = models.CharField("What is pi") answer = models.FloatField() But this has the obvious problem in that each question has a specific model - so if we need to add a question later I have to change the database. Yuck. So now I want to get fancy - How do a set up a model where by the answer type conversion happens automagically? ANSWER_TYPES = ( ('boolean', 'boolean'), ('date', 'date'), ('float', 'float'), ('int', 'int'), ('char', 'char'), ) class Questions(models.model): question = models.CharField(() answer = models.CharField() answer_type = models.CharField(choices = ANSWER_TYPES) default = models.CharField() So in theory this would do the following: When I build up my views I look at the type of answer and ensure that I only put in that value. But when I want to pull that answer back out it will return the data in the format specified by the answer_type. Example 3.14 comes back out as a float not as a str. How can I perform this sort of automagic transformation? Or can someone suggest a better way to do this? Thanks much!!

    Read the article

  • Django Many-to-Many Question

    - by DZ
    My questions seems like a common problem that when I have seen any questions on it is never really asked right or not answered. So Im going to try to get the question right, and maybe someone knows how to resolve the issue, or correct my understanding. The problem: When you have a many-to-many relation ship (related_name not through) and you are trying to use the admin interface you are required to input one of the rleationships even though it does not have to exsist for you to create the first entry. Meaning you have to assign a group to an event to create the group. Wow that sounds complicated. So I can see why the question is not getting answered. Lets try the non code explanation example... First and important versions: Django 1.1.1 Phython 2.6 So I have a model where I created a many-to-many realtionship and Im using the related_name Im creating an app that is an event organizer, for simplicty lets say events although they could be anytype). For this first post Im going to stay away from the code and just try to explain. A few keys: (explaining comment) ** - many-to-many So in the model we have 1) The Main Event (this is main model) 2) Groups (link to events and their can be many events for a group) a) Events** I have simplified this example a little becuase I recognize that what does it matter. Just create the event first... But there are specific varations where that will not work. What the many-to-many related_name does it created another table with the indecies of the two other tables. Nothing says that this extra table HAS to be populated. Becuase if I look in the database and work within myPHPadmin I can create a group with out registering an event, since the connection between the two is a seperate table the DB does not care. How do I make the admin interface this realize it? Ok I know thats a lot so I hope I have explained it clearly. Thank you anyone for your comments/thoughts/advice

    Read the article

  • Reordering fields in Django model

    - by Alex Lebedev
    I want to add few fields to every model in my django application. This time it's created_at, updated_at and notes. Duplicating code for every of 20+ models seems dumb. So, I decided to use abstract base class which would add these fields. The problem is that fields inherited from abstract base class come first in the field list in admin. Declaring field order for every ModelAdmin class is not an option, it's even more duplicate code than with manual field declaration. In my final solution, I modified model constructor to reorder fields in _meta before creating new instance: class MyModel(models.Model): # Service fields notes = my_fields.NotesField() created_at = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True) updated_at = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=True) class Meta: abstract = True last_fields = ("notes", "created_at", "updated_at") def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs): new_order = [f.name for f in self._meta.fields] for field in self.last_fields: new_order.remove(field) new_order.append(field) self._meta._field_name_cache.sort(key=lambda x: new_order.index(x.name)) super(TwangooModel, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs) class ModelA(MyModel): field1 = models.CharField() field2 = models.CharField() #etc ... It works as intended, but I'm wondering, is there a better way to acheive my goal?

    Read the article

  • Django Admin Running Same Query Thousands of Times for Model

    - by Tom
    Running into an odd . . . loop when trying to view a model in the Django admin. I have three related models (code trimmed for brevity, hopefully I didn't trim something I shouldn't have): class Association(models.Model): somecompany_entity_id = models.CharField(max_length=10, db_index=True) name = models.CharField(max_length=200) def __unicode__(self): return self.name class ResidentialUnit(models.Model): building = models.CharField(max_length=10) app_number = models.CharField(max_length=10) unit_number = models.CharField(max_length=10) unit_description = models.CharField(max_length=100, blank=True) association = models.ForeignKey(Association) created = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True) updated = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=True) def __unicode__(self): return '%s: %s, Unit %s' % (self.association, self.building, self.unit_number) class Resident(models.Model): unit = models.ForeignKey(ResidentialUnit) type = models.CharField(max_length=20, blank=True, default='') lookup_key = models.CharField(max_length=200) jenark_id = models.CharField(max_length=20, blank=True) user = models.ForeignKey(User) is_association_admin = models.BooleanField(default=False, db_index=True) show_in_contact_list = models.BooleanField(default=False, db_index=True) created = models.DateTimeField(auto_now_add=True) updated = models.DateTimeField(auto_now=True) _phones = {} home_phone = None work_phone = None cell_phone = None app_number = None account_cache_key = None def __unicode__(self): return '%s' % self.user.get_full_name() It's the last model that's causing the problem. Trying to look at a Resident in the admin takes 10-20 seconds. If I take 'self.association' out of the __unicode__ method for ResidentialUnit, a resident page renders pretty quickly. Looking at it in the debug toolbar, without the association name in ResidentialUnit (which is a foreign key on Resident), the page runs 14 queries. With the association name put back in, it runs a far more impressive 4,872 queries. The strangest part is the extra queries all seem to be looking up the association name. They all come from the same line, the __unicode__ method for ResidentialUnit. Each one is the exact same thing, e.g., SELECT `residents_association`.`id`, `residents_association`.`jenark_entity_id`, `residents_association`.`name` FROM `residents_association` WHERE `residents_association`.`id` = 1096 ORDER BY `residents_association`.`name` ASC I assume I've managed to create a circular reference, but if it were truly circular, it would just die, not run 4000x and then return. Having trouble finding a good Google or StackOverflow result for this.

    Read the article

  • Refactoring a custom User model to user UserProfile: Should I create a custom UserManager or add use

    - by BryanWheelock
    I have been refactoring an app that had customized the standard User model from django.contrib.auth.models by creating a UserProfile and defining it with AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE. The problem is the attributes in UserProfile are used throughout the project to determine the User sees. I had been creating tests and putting in this type of statement repeatedly: user = User.objects.get(pk=1) user_profile = user.get_profile() if user_profile.karma > 10: do_some_stuff() This is tedious and I'm now wondering if I'm violating the DRY principle. Would it make more sense to create a custom UserManager that automatically loads the UserProfile data when the user is requested. I could even iterate over the UserProfile attributes and append them to the User model. This would save me having to update all the references to the custom model attributes that litter the code. Of course, I'd have to reverse to process for to allow the User and UserProfile models to be updated correctly. Which approach is more Django-esque?

    Read the article

  • Parameterized Django models

    - by mgibsonbr
    In principle, a single Django application can be reused in two or more projects, providing functionality relevent to both. That implies that the same database structure (tables and relations) will be re-created identically in different databases, and most times this is not a problem (assuming the projects/databases are unrelated - for instance when someone downloads a complete app to use in their own projects). Sometimes, however, the models must be "tweaked" a little to better fit the problem needs. This can be accomplished by forking the app, but I wondered if there wouldn't be a better option in cases where the app designer can anticipate the most common customizations. For instance, if I have a model that could relate to another as one-to-one or one-to-many, I could specify the unique property as a parameter, that can be specified in the project's settings: class This(models.Model): other = models.ForeignKey(Other, unique=settings.OTHER_TO_THIS) Or if a model can relate to many others, I could create an intermediate table for each of them (thus enforcing referential integrity) instead of using generic fks: for related in settings.MODELS_RELATED_TO_OTHER: model_name = '%s_Other' % related globals()[model_name] = type(model_name, (models.Model,) { me:models.ForeignKey(find_model_class(related)), other:models.ForeignKey(Other), # Some other properties all intersection tables must have }) Etc. Let me stress out that I'm not proposing to change the models at runtime nor anything like that; once the parameters were defined and syncdb called for the first time, those parameters are not to be changed again (unless you're doing a schema migration). Is this a good design? Are there better ways to accomplish the same thing, or maybe drawbacks I coulnd't anticipate? This technique is meant to be used sparingly (only on apps meant to be reused in wildly different contexts, and only when a specific need of customization can be detected while the app model is being designed).

    Read the article

  • Authenticate with Django 1.5

    - by gorjuce
    I'm currently testing django 1.5 and a custom User model, but I've some problems. I've created a User class in my account app, which looks like: class User(AbstractBaseUser): email = models.EmailField() activation_key = models.CharField(max_length=255) is_active = models.BooleanField(default=False) is_admin = models.BooleanField(default=False) USERNAME_FIELD = 'email' I can correctly register a user, who is stored in my account_user table. Now, how can I log in? I've tried with: def login(request): form = AuthenticationForm() if request.method == 'POST': form = AuthenticationForm(request.POST) email = request.POST['username'] password = request.POST['password'] user = authenticate(username=email, password=password) if user is not None: if user.is_active: login(user) else: message = 'disabled account, check validation email' return render( request, 'account-login-failed.html', {'message': message} ) return render(request, 'account-login.html', {'form': form}) I can correctly register a new User My forms.py which contains my register form class RegisterForm(forms.ModelForm): """ a form to create user""" password = forms.CharField( label="Password", widget=forms.PasswordInput() ) password_confirm = forms.CharField( label="Password Repeat", widget=forms.PasswordInput() ) class Meta: model = User exclude = ('last_login', 'activation_key') def clean_password_confirm(self): password = self.cleaned_data.get("password") password_confirm = self.cleaned_data.get("password_confirm") if password and password_confirm and password != password_confirm: raise forms.ValidationError("Password don't math") return password_confirm def clean_email(self): if User.objects.filter(email__iexact=self.cleaned_data.get("email")): raise forms.ValidationError("email already exists") return self.cleaned_data['email'] def save(self): user = super(RegisterForm, self).save(commit=False) user.password = self.cleaned_data['password'] user.activation_key = generate_sha1(user.email) user.save() return user My question is: Why does authenticate give me None? I know I'm trying to authenticate() with an email as username but is that not one of the reasons to use a custom User model?

    Read the article

  • Adding a generic image field onto a ModelForm in django

    - by Prairiedogg
    I have two models, Room and Image. Image is a generic model that can tack onto any other model. I want to give users a form to upload an image when they post information about a room. I've written code that works, but I'm afraid I've done it the hard way, and specifically in a way that violates DRY. Was hoping someone who's a little more familiar with django forms could point out where I've gone wrong. Update: I've tried to clarify why I chose this design in comments to the current answers. To summarize: I didn't simply put an ImageField on the Room model because I wanted more than one image associated with the Room model. I chose a generic Image model because I wanted to add images to several different models. The alternatives I considered were were multiple foreign keys on a single Image class, which seemed messy, or multiple Image classes, which I thought would clutter my schema. I didn't make this clear in my first post, so sorry about that. Seeing as none of the answers so far has addressed how to make this a little more DRY I did come up with my own solution which was to add the upload path as a class attribute on the image model and reference that every time it's needed. # Models class Image(models.Model): content_type = models.ForeignKey(ContentType) object_id = models.PositiveIntegerField() content_object = generic.GenericForeignKey('content_type', 'object_id') image = models.ImageField(_('Image'), height_field='', width_field='', upload_to='uploads/images', max_length=200) class Room(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=50) image_set = generic.GenericRelation('Image') # The form class AddRoomForm(forms.ModelForm): image_1 = forms.ImageField() class Meta: model = Room # The view def handle_uploaded_file(f): # DRY violation, I've already specified the upload path in the image model upload_suffix = join('uploads/images', f.name) upload_path = join(settings.MEDIA_ROOT, upload_suffix) destination = open(upload_path, 'wb+') for chunk in f.chunks(): destination.write(chunk) destination.close() return upload_suffix def add_room(request, apartment_id, form_class=AddRoomForm, template='apartments/add_room.html'): apartment = Apartment.objects.get(id=apartment_id) if request.method == 'POST': form = form_class(request.POST, request.FILES) if form.is_valid(): room = form.save() image_1 = form.cleaned_data['image_1'] # Instead of writing a special function to handle the image, # shouldn't I just be able to pass it straight into Image.objects.create # ...but it doesn't seem to work for some reason, wrong syntax perhaps? upload_path = handle_uploaded_file(image_1) image = Image.objects.create(content_object=room, image=upload_path) return HttpResponseRedirect(room.get_absolute_url()) else: form = form_class() context = {'form': form, } return direct_to_template(request, template, extra_context=context)

    Read the article

  • Django admin fails when using includes in urlpatterns

    - by zenWeasel
    I am trying to refactor out my application a little bit to keep it from getting too unwieldily. So I started to move some of the urlpatterns out to sub files as the documentation proposes. Besides that fact that it just doesn't seem to be working (the items are not being rerouted) but when I go to the admin, it says that 'urlpatterns has not been defined'. The urls.py I have at the root of my application is: if settings.ENABLE_SSL: urlpatterns = patterns('', (r'^checkout/orderform/onepage/(\w*)/$','checkout.views.one_page_orderform',{'SSL':True},'commerce.checkout.views.single_product_orderform'), ) else: urlpatterns = patterns('', (r'^checkout/orderform/onepage/(\w*)/$','commerce.checkout.views.single_product_orderform'), ) urlpatterns+= patterns('', (r'^$', 'alchemysites.views.route_to_home'), (r'^%s/' % settings.DAJAXICE_MEDIA_PREFIX, include('dajaxice.urls')), (r'^/checkout/', include('commerce.urls')), (r'^/offers',include('commerce.urls')), (r'^/order/',include('commerce.urls')), (r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)), (r'^accounts/login/$', login), (r'^accounts/logout/$', logout), (r'^(?P<path>.*)/$','alchemysites.views.get_path'), (r'^static/(?P<path>.*)$', 'django.views.static.serve', {'document_root':settings.MEDIA_ROOT}), The urls I have moved out so far are the checkout/offers/order which are all subapps of 'commerce' where the urls.py for the apps are so to be clear. /urls.py in questions (included here) /commerce/urls.py where the urls.py I want to include is: order_info = { 'queryset': Order.objects.all(), } urlpatterns+= patterns('', (r'^offers/$','offers.views.start_offers'), (r'^offers/([a-zA-Z0-9-]*)/order/(\d*)/add/([a-zA-Z0-9-]*)/(\w*)/next/([a-zA-Z0-9-)/$','offers.views.show_offer'), (r'^reports/orders/$', list_detail.object_list,order_info), ) and the applications offers lies under commerce. And so the additional problem is that admin will not work at all, so I'm thinking because I killed it somewhere with my includes. Things I have checked for: Is the urlpatterns variable accidentally getting reset somewhere (i.e. urlpatterns = patterns, instead of urlpatterns+= patterns) Are the patterns in commerce.urls valid (yes, when moved back to root they work). So from there I am stumped. I can move everything back into the root, but was trying to get a little decoupled, not just for theoretical reason but for some short terms ones. Lastly if I enter www.domainname/checkout/orderform/onepage/xxxjsd I get the correct page. However, entering www.domainname/checkout/ gets handled by the alchemysites.views.get_path. If not the answer (because this is pretty darn specific), then is there a good way for troubleshoot urls.py? It seems to just be trial and error. Seems there should be some sort of parser that will tell you what your urlpatterns will do.

    Read the article

  • How to get users to commit and collaborate to make a website valuable? [closed]

    - by AzizAG
    I own a website that requires a fairly largish amount of users to collaborate and commit occasionally to make the website valuable, so basically, the website can't be any valuable without users helping me put some content on it. To not get confused, I'm thinking of websites like Wikipedia, Stack Exchange and Yahoo! Answers, most of the content is based on peer effort. How do they actually get users interested and committed in the first place? What are the things I have to do to get users involved in the website and actually help me grow it bigger?

    Read the article

  • Is There A Security Risk With Users That Are Also Groups?

    - by Rob P.
    I know a little about users and groups; in the past I might have had a group like 'DBAS' or 'ADMINS' and I'd add individual users to each group... But I was surprised to learn I could add users to other users - as if they were groups. For example if my /etc/group contained the following: user1:x:12501: user2:x:12502:user1 admin:x:123:user2,jim,bob Since user2 is a member of the admin group, and user1 is a member of user2 - is user1 effectively an admin? If the admin group is in the sudoers file, can user1 use it as well? I've tried to simulate this and I haven't been able to do so as user1...but I'm not sure it's impossible. EDIT: SORRY - updated error in question.

    Read the article

  • Assigning a group while adding user in django-admin

    - by Lokharkey
    In my application, I have models that have the Users model as a Foreign key, eg: class Doctor(models.Model): username=models.ForeignKey(User, unique=True) ... In the admin site, when adding a new Doctor, I have the option of adding a new User next to the username field. This is exactly what I want, but in the dialog that opens, it asks for a username and password for the new user; I would also like to be able to assign a group to this new user. What would be the best way of doing this ? Thanks, lokharkey

    Read the article

  • adding errors to Django form errors.__all__

    - by hendrixski
    How do I add errors to the top of a form after I cleaned the data? I have an object that needs to make a REST call to an external app (google maps) as a pre-save condition, and this can fail, which means I need my users to correct the data in the form. So I clean the data and then try to save and add to the form errors if the save doesn't work: if request.method == "POST": #clean form data try: profile.save() return HttpResponseRedirect(reverse("some_page", args=[some.args])) except ValueError: our_form.errors.__all__ = [u"error message goes here"] return render_to_response(template_name, {"ourform": our_form,}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) This failed to return the error text in my unit-tests (which were looking for it in {{form.non_field_errors}}), and then when I run it through the debugger, the errors had not been added to the forms error dict when they reach the render_to_response line, nor anywhere else in the our_form tree. Why didn't this work? How am I supposed to add errors to the top of a form after it's been cleaned?

    Read the article

  • Django comments form validation, check if the comment is from authenticated user

    - by Headcrab
    I wanted to add reCaptcha to the comment form, but only for non-authenticated users. I've created my own comments app, using reCaptcha more or less according to this post, except that I don't have any (explicit) view function to post the comment, but instead I check captcha as a part of form validation process. Everything works fine so far. Now, how do I disable reCaptcha for a logged in user? Removing all reCaptcha-related fields in the template is no problem, but how do I validate the form, not checking captcha if the comment if from an authenticated user? Alternatively, is there a way to use two different comment form classes, depending on whether the user is authenticated or not?

    Read the article

  • Django: How/Where to store a value for a session without unnecessary DB hits

    - by GerardJP
    Hi all, I have an extended userprofile with AUTH_PROFILE_MODULE (ref: http://tinyurl.com/yhracqq) I would like to set a user.is_guru() method similar to user.is_active(). This would results for al views (or rather templates) to e.g. disable/enable certain user messages, displaying of widgets, etc. The boolean is stored in the extended user profile model, but I want to avoid hitting the DB for every view. So the questions is .. Do I use a context_processor, a template tag, session_dict or what have you to, possible cached, store this info for the duration of the users visit. Note: I dont have performance issues, so it's definitely filed under premature optimization. I just want to avoid generating extra work in the future :). Any pointers are very welcome. Thanx and greetz! Gerard.

    Read the article

  • Django forms: prepopulate form with request.user and url parameter

    - by Malyo
    I'm building simple Course Management App. I want Users to sign up for Course. Here's sign up model: class CourseMembers(models.Model): student = models.ForeignKey(Student) course = models.ForeignKey(Course) def __unicode__(self): return unicode(self.student) Student model is extended User model - I'd like to fill the form with request.user. In Course model most important is course_id, which i'm passing into view throught URL parameter (for example http://127.0.0.1:8000/courses/course/1/). What i want to achieve, is to generate 'invisible' (so user can't change the inserted data) form with just input, but containing request.user and course_id parameter.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing in Django

    - by acjohnson55
    I'm really struggling to write effective unit tests for a large Django project. I have reasonably good test coverage, but I've come to realize that the tests I've been writing are definitely integration/acceptance tests, not unit tests at all, and I have critical portions of my application that are not being tested effectively. I want to fix this ASAP. Here's my problem. My schema is deeply relational, and heavily time-oriented, giving my model object high internal coupling and lots of state. Many of my model methods query based on time intervals, and I've got a lot of auto_now_add going on in timestamped fields. So take a method that looks like this for example: def summary(self, startTime=None, endTime=None): # ... logic to assign a proper start and end time # if none was provided, probably using datetime.now() objects = self.related_model_set.manager_method.filter(...) return sum(object.key_method(startTime, endTime) for object in objects) How does one approach testing something like this? Here's where I am so far. It occurs to me that the unit testing objective should be given some mocked behavior by key_method on its arguments, is summary correctly filtering/aggregating to produce a correct result? Mocking datetime.now() is straightforward enough, but how can I mock out the rest of the behavior? I could use fixtures, but I've heard pros and cons of using fixtures for building my data (poor maintainability being a con that hits home for me). I could also setup my data through the ORM, but that can be limiting, because then I have to create related objects as well. And the ORM doesn't let you mess with auto_now_add fields manually. Mocking the ORM is another option, but not only is it tricky to mock deeply nested ORM methods, but the logic in the ORM code gets mocked out of the test, and mocking seems to make the test really dependent on the internals and dependencies of the function-under-test. The toughest nuts to crack seem to be the functions like this, that sit on a few layers of models and lower-level functions and are very dependent on the time, even though these functions may not be super complicated. My overall problem is that no matter how I seem to slice it, my tests are looking way more complex than the functions they are testing.

    Read the article

  • Profiles and using the local profile for a domain user

    - by Harry
    I’m having some trouble with profiles and would like to reach out for some help. I’ve tried to do some research to help myself along, but I’m not making much progress on my own. I’ve pretty much taken over the sys admin duties for my small lab, I don’t have much experience to justify it besides I’m the only with the time and dedication to go at it (The environment was in a state of disrepair). My network and domain I look over are extremely small by most standards, about 10 users at a time. They are pretty intensive activity on the network, and we do work with fairly large files. None of the network is online, which is nice at the moment because it allows me not to have another headache. On to my profile problem, I have set up roaming profiles for the users in the network. Now after a little research, I think I will be switching this to a hybrid of folder redirection and roaming profiles as this seems to best practice. I also don’t want the users having to wait for a long time if they have a bloated profile. Now I’ve finally got a build working using MDT. We have Mac Pros, and it wasn’t fun getting everything to play nice. The way I did this was by setting up a reference computer and installing all the software and tools that each user would need and editing the settings preferences to how we would need them. I think used MDT to do a sys prep and capture to create the image of my reference computer. Using the reference image I can push out my images to the rest of the desktops in my environment. The issue I’m having is when we join the computer to domain. The user can login and operate fine on the computer, but I’d like a more. When the user is logged on with their domain user name they lose a lot of the icons I had on my reference image, as well as the desktop background and some other miscellaneous settings. I would love to have the user log on using their domain user name and see the icons and desktop environment as I had it setup on the reference computer. I’m not sure if it is possible, or something simple that I’m missing, but any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Django extending user model and displaying form

    - by MichalKlich
    Hello, I am writing website and i`d like to implement profile managment. Basic thing would be to edit some of user details by themself, like first and last name etc. Now, i had to extend User model to add my own stuff, and email address. I am having troubles with displaying form. Example will describe better what i would like achieve. This is mine extended user model. class UserExtended(models.Model): user = models.ForeignKey(User, unique=True) kod_pocztowy = models.CharField(max_length=6,blank=True) email = models.EmailField() This is how my form looks like. class UserCreationFormExtended(UserCreationForm): def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs): super(UserCreationFormExtended, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs) self.fields['email'].required = True self.fields['first_name'].required = False self.fields['last_name'].required = False class Meta: model = User fields = ('username', 'first_name', 'last_name', 'email') It works fine when registering, as i need allow users to put username and email but when it goes to editing profile it displays too many fields. I would not like them to be able to edit username and email. How could i disable fields in form? Thanks for help.

    Read the article

  • Django ManyToMany Membership errors making associations

    - by jmitchel3
    I'm trying to have a "member admin" in which they have hundreds of members in the group. These members can be in several groups. Admins can remove access for the member ideally in the view. I'm having trouble just creating the group. I used a ManytoManyField to get started. Ideally, the "member admin" would be able to either select existing Users OR it would be able to Add/Invite new ones via email address. Here's what I have: #views.py def membership(request): group = Group.objects.all().filter(user=request.user) GroupFormSet = modelformset_factory(Group, form=MembershipForm) if request.method == 'POST': formset = GroupFormSet(request.POST, request.FILES, queryset=group) if formset.is_valid(): formset.save(commit=False) for form in formset: form.instance.user = request.user formset.save() return render_to_response('formset.html', locals(), context_instance=RequestContext(request)) else: formset= GroupFormSet(queryset=group) return render_to_response('formset.html', locals(), context_instance=RequestContext(request)) #models.py class Group(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=128) members = models.ManyToManyField(User, related_name='community_members', through='Membership') user = models.ForeignKey(User, related_name='community_creator', null=True) def __unicode__(self): return self.name class Membership(models.Model): member = models.ForeignKey(User, related_name='user_membership', blank=True, null=True) group = models.ForeignKey(Group, related_name='community_membership', blank=True, null=True) date_joined = models.DateField(auto_now=True, blank=True, null=True) class Meta: unique_together = ('member', 'group') Any ideas? Thank you for your help.

    Read the article

  • django+uploadify - don't working

    - by Erico
    Hi, I'm trying to use an example posted on the "github" the link is http://github.com/tstone/django-uploadify. And I'm having trouble getting work. can you help me? I followed step by step, but does not work. Accessing the "URL" / upload / the only thing is that returns "True" part of settings.py import os PROJECT_ROOT_PATH = os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(file)) MEDIA_ROOT = os.path.join(PROJECT_ROOT_PATH, 'media') TEMPLATE_DIRS = ( os.path.join(PROJECT_ROOT_PATH, 'templates')) urls.py from django.conf.urls.defaults import * from django.conf import settings from teste.uploadify.views import * from django.contrib import admin admin.autodiscover() urlpatterns = patterns('', (r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)), url(r'upload/$', upload, name='uploadify_upload'), ) views.py from django.http import HttpResponse import django.dispatch upload_received = django.dispatch.Signal(providing_args=['data']) def upload(request, *args, **kwargs): if request.method == 'POST': if request.FILES: upload_received.send(sender='uploadify', data=request.FILES['Filedata']) return HttpResponse('True') models.py from django.db import models def upload_received_handler(sender, data, **kwargs): if file: new_media = Media.objects.create( file = data, new_upload = True, ) new_media.save() upload_received.connect(upload_received_handler, dispatch_uid='uploadify.media.upload_received') class Media(models.Model): file = models.FileField(upload_to='images/upload/', null=True, blank=True) new_upload = models.BooleanField() uploadify_tags.py from django import template from teste import settings register = template.Library() @register.inclusion_tag('uploadify/multi_file_upload.html', takes_context=True) def multi_file_upload(context, upload_complete_url): """ * filesUploaded - The total number of files uploaded * errors - The total number of errors while uploading * allBytesLoaded - The total number of bytes uploaded * speed - The average speed of all uploaded files """ return { 'upload_complete_url' : upload_complete_url, 'uploadify_path' : settings.UPLOADIFY_PATH, # checar essa linha 'upload_path' : settings.UPLOADIFY_UPLOAD_PATH, } template - uploadify/multi_file_upload.html {% load uploadify_tags }{ multi_file_upload '/media/images/upload/' %} <script type="text/javascript" src="{{ MEDIA_URL }}js/swfobject.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="{{ MEDIA_URL }}js/jquery.uploadify.js"></script> <div id="uploadify" class="multi-file-upload"><input id="fileInput" name="fileInput" type="file" /></div> <script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[ $(document).ready(function() { $('#fileInput').uploadify({ 'uploader' : '/media/swf/uploadify.swf', 'script' : '{% url uploadify_upload %}', 'cancelImg' : '/media/images/uploadify-remove.png/', 'auto' : true, 'folder' : '/media/images/upload/', 'multi' : true, 'onAllComplete' : allComplete }); }); function allComplete(event, data) { $('#uploadify').load('{{ upload_complete_url }}', { 'filesUploaded' : data.filesUploaded, 'errorCount' : data.errors, 'allBytesLoaded' : data.allBytesLoaded, 'speed' : data.speed }); // raise custom event $('#uploadify') .trigger('allUploadsComplete', data); } // ]]</script>

    Read the article

  • django: can't adapt error when importing data from postgres database

    - by Oleg Tarasenko
    Hi, I'm having strange error with installing fixture from dumped data. I am using psycopg2, and django1.1.1 silver:probsbox oleg$ python manage.py loaddata /Users/oleg/probs.json Installing json fixture '/Users/oleg/probs' from '/Users/oleg/probs'. Problem installing fixture '/Users/oleg/probs.json': Traceback (most recent call last): File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/core/management/commands/loaddata.py", line 153, in handle obj.save() File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/core/serializers/base.py", line 163, in save models.Model.save_base(self.object, raw=True) File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/db/models/base.py", line 495, in save_base result = manager._insert(values, return_id=update_pk) File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/db/models/manager.py", line 177, in _insert return insert_query(self.model, values, **kwargs) File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/db/models/query.py", line 1087, in insert_query return query.execute_sql(return_id) File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/db/models/sql/subqueries.py", line 320, in execute_sql cursor = super(InsertQuery, self).execute_sql(None) File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/db/models/sql/query.py", line 2369, in execute_sql cursor.execute(sql, params) File "/opt/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/django/db/backends/util.py", line 19, in execute return self.cursor.execute(sql, params) ProgrammingError: can't adapt First I've checked similar issues on internet. This one seemed to be very related: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5996, as my data has many non ASCII symbols But actually I've checked my django installation and it's ok there Could you advice what is wrong

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >