> Regardless, the context for that discussion is quite
> different to the context of this current discussion.
I take back what I said on my last note.
-Alen
On May 6, 8:43 am, "Russell Keith-Magee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > You might want to check the date on that thread before you pull it in
> > for moral support.
>
> If you bothered taking a look at the thread, you would have seen that
> the decision to keep the pluralize simple
> You might want to check the date on that thread before you pull it in
> for moral support.
If you bothered taking a look at the thread, you would have seen that
the decision to keep the pluralize simple was discussed and probably
introduced as the way forward at the time. Hence my reference. (B
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 6:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Important, related, post on the dev list:
>
> "Ditch pluralisation entirely"
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/951d113483083ce9/83c18a7a4b2e136e?lnk=gst&q=plural#83c18a7a4b2
> So you still need to allow for the developer (me) to override the generated
> plural. Only now it isn't as clear when I need to do that. With the
> current rule, it is straightforward: if the word isn't pluralized by adding
> an 's'.
The idea is that you wouldn't have to override the generate
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Thank you for your replies.
>
> Just to confirm, I am not referring to a perfect automatic pluralize
> solution. I am very well aware that a silver bullet solution would be
> very difficult, if even possible.
>
> I wi
Thank you for your replies.
Just to confirm, I am not referring to a perfect automatic pluralize
solution. I am very well aware that a silver bullet solution would be
very difficult, if even possible.
I will try make myself more clear now. What I am specifically
referring to is the 'verbose_name
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 1:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is it? Maybe. I don't know if anyone has proposed smartening-up Django's
> > pluralization rules in the past
>
> I had a look through the mailing-list archive and couldn't spot
> anything directly related.
Th
I think you are assuming too much here. The verbose name and verbose
name plurals are default pulled from a class name that might not
necessarily make sense to my editors in the admin. I need to have some
control to how it is actually displayed to the end user; no program is
going to be ab
> Is it? Maybe. I don't know if anyone has proposed smartening-up Django's
> pluralization rules in the past
I had a look through the mailing-list archive and couldn't spot
anything directly related.
> (I'm not even sure if you are proposing it
> here?).
I pretty much am proposing it here. I
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 5:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Could someone please be kind to explain to me how the pluralize logic
> works in django?
> a.) pluralize template filter
Doc for this is here:
http://www.djangoproject.com/documentation/templates/#pluralize
> b.) Me
Could someone please be kind to explain to me how the pluralize logic
works in django?
a.) pluralize template filter
b.) Meta.verbose_name_plural
As default, I am expecting the pluralize to convert "country" to
"countries". For exapmle, this doesn't happen in admin so I define the
verbose_name_pl
12 matches
Mail list logo
