First off - my apologies to all who have replied so diligently without
so much as a "hi" from me before now... soon after posting this I
fell ill and did not have an opportunity to reply.
Second; I posted this same message three days ago and for some unknown
reason, it did not show up on the mail
Thank you everybody. Chapter closed.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 4:11 AM, Steven Elliott Jr
wrote:
> I've always found both the Django and Python communities to be among the
> friendliest and most helpful. Please be kind to one another and respectful
> of everyones comments. We are here to support on
I've always found both the Django and Python communities to be among
the friendliest and most helpful. Please be kind to one another and
respectful of everyones comments. We are here to support one another
in our efforts to better our django skills and to better the community
and project as
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 4:11 AM, Sithembewena Lloyd Dube
wrote:
> I wonder what Atamert the peacemaker has to say now, since the person to
> whose defense he came admitted he was wrong. Amazing to note that Atamert
> noticed my directness to Bruno, but did not notice how nasty Bruno was to
> other
So, Atamert, Bruno admitted he was wrong. What have you to say??
It's strange that you noticed i was direct with him,but you did not seem to
notice how harsh he was to Emily and Derek??
Anyways, peace..
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Atamert Ölçgen wrote:
> Hi Sithembewena,
>
>
> On Thursda
I wonder what Atamert the peacemaker has to say now, since the person to
whose defense he came admitted he was wrong. Amazing to note that Atamert
noticed my directness to Bruno, but did not notice how nasty Bruno was to
other respondents (namely Emily and Derek).
What have you to say, o' wise Ata
Lol..c'mon Bruno, we just resolved this. Stop attacking Emily. You admitted
in your email to me that you could be, in your own words, an "asshole"
sometimes, that your words were "uselessly harsh", and that Emily was right.
Why come onto the thread and attack her again?
I declare this matter close
On 18 fév, 12:16, Emily Rodgers
wrote:
(snip)
> I think he stopped helping when he started using phrases like 'crystal
> ball' and 'wild-guess programming'. They are hostile responses.
>
Emily, if you manage to stick to your wishfull words for the next ten
years without even a single possibly "ho
On 18 fév, 12:03, Sithembewena Lloyd Dube wrote:
> Apologies for my handling of this matter earlier. It was not the Python way
> :)
>
> Bruno, feel welcome here.
>
Ok, I'm back then !-)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django users" group.
To post t
I hope that we can all learn somehow from the incident. When i reacted the
way i did, i was picking up subtle undertones of aggression which i thought
were undue. I have since spoke to Bruno and diffused the situation amicably.
I would agree with what Emily says, and the things I take away from it
On Feb 18, 9:25 am, Atamert Ölçgen wrote:
> Hi Sithembewena,
>
> On Thursday 18 February 2010 00:27:10 Sithembewena Lloyd Dube wrote:> Emily
> provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
> > harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
> > solution.
Apologies for my handling of this matter earlier. It was not the Python way
:)
Bruno, feel welcome here.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Atamert Ölçgen wrote:
> Hi Sithembewena,
>
>
> On Thursday 18 February 2010 00:27:10 Sithembewena Lloyd Dube wrote:
> > Emily provided an answer according
Hi Sithembewena,
On Thursday 18 February 2010 00:27:10 Sithembewena Lloyd Dube wrote:
> Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
> harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
> solution..
>
> I think that people who have a problem with post
On Feb 17, 11:32 pm, Sithembewena Lloyd Dube
wrote:
> Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
> harm in doing that,
> at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
> solution..
I wouldn't have asked for precisions if I didn't intend to try and
help.
> This is n
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
solution..
I suspect this is more plausible than philosophising away all night.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:00 AM, bruno desthuilliers <
bruno.desthuilli...@
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
solution..
To me, this is more plausible than philosophising away all night.
Lloyd
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:00 AM, bruno desthuilliers <
bruno.desthuilli
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
solution..
I suspect this is more plausible than philosophising away all night.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:00 AM, bruno desthuilliers <
bruno.desthuilli...@
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a solution.
We have no interest in your personal coding style: attempt to help, or zip
your gob. Have had it with egomaniacs running loose..
Lloyd
On Thu, Fe
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
solution..
I suspect this is more plausible than philosophising away all night.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:00 AM, bruno desthuilliers <
bruno.desthuilli...@
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
solution..
I think that people who have a problem with posts, even vague ones, should
stay away from them - let those that would try to help, to do so
unhind
Emily provided an answer according to what she understood from the OP. No
harm in doing that, at least not worse than no attempt at giving a
solution..
This is not a parade for anyone's personal coding style: attempt to help, or
stay away.
Lloyd
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 1:20 PM, bruno desthuillie
On 17 fév, 17:29, Emily Rodgers
wrote:
> As I said, we aren't doing his coding for him,
And as I said, this is _not_ the problem. I don't mind providing
working code as an answer, and did it on quite a few occasions during
the past 10 years or so, on various newsgroups and mailing lists. But
c
On Feb 17, 11:20 am, bruno desthuilliers
wrote:
> On Feb 17, 10:12 am, Emily Rodgers
> wrote:> On Feb 16, 4:50 pm, bruno desthuilliers
> > > I'm afraid I don't really get what difference it would make. Note that
> > > my question was genuine - I know zilch about the problem domain, I
> > > don'
On Feb 17, 10:12 am, Emily Rodgers
wrote:
> On Feb 16, 4:50 pm, bruno desthuilliers
> > I'm afraid I don't really get what difference it would make. Note that
> > my question was genuine - I know zilch about the problem domain, I
> > don't have the fisrt clue about what an "Alliance" might be, so
On Feb 16, 4:50 pm, bruno desthuilliers
wrote:
> On Feb 16, 4:54 pm, Emily Rodgers
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 16, 3:39 pm, bruno desthuilliers
>
> > wrote:
> > > On Feb 16, 2:56 pm, Derek wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Ain't that "memberships" relationship redundant with passenger->flight-
>
> > > >o
On Feb 16, 4:54 pm, Emily Rodgers
wrote:
> On Feb 16, 3:39 pm, bruno desthuilliers
>
> wrote:
> > On Feb 16, 2:56 pm, Derek wrote:
> [snip]
> > Ain't that "memberships" relationship redundant with passenger->flight-
>
> > >operator->memberships ?
>
> I reckon he probably wants to do is split pas
On Feb 16, 3:39 pm, bruno desthuilliers
wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2:56 pm, Derek wrote:
[snip]
> Ain't that "memberships" relationship redundant with passenger->flight-
>
> >operator->memberships ?
I reckon he probably wants to do is split passenger up:
class Passenger(models.Model):
customer =
On Feb 16, 1:56 pm, Derek wrote:
> (not a movie trivia problem!)
>
> The question I need to resolve here is "does Passenger 57 qualify for a
> discount"?
>
> Given the following models:
>
> class Alliance(models.Model):
> name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
> #e.g. Star, Western, Pac
On Feb 16, 2:56 pm, Derek wrote:
> (not a movie trivia problem!)
>
> The question I need to resolve here is "does Passenger 57 qualify for a
> discount"?
>
> Given the following models:
>
> class Alliance(models.Model):
> name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
> #e.g. Star, Western, Pac
(not a movie trivia problem!)
The question I need to resolve here is "does Passenger 57 qualify for a
discount"?
Given the following models:
class Alliance(models.Model):
name = models.CharField(max_length=100)
#e.g. Star, Western, Pacific, European
discount = models.FloatField()
cl
30 matches
Mail list logo
