> By "insert" I mean the initial creation of a tuple with that id in the
> database, not subsequent updates of it.
Yeah, sorry, I was thinking "insert" in English, not INSERT as in
INSERT vs UPDATE, etc.
Brett Hoerner wrote:
> Robert Wittams wrote:
>
>>both auto_now and auto_now_add are quite hackish little puppies.
>>
>>auto_now should really be equivalent to a _pre_save that sets the field
>>to the current time.
>>
>>auto_now_add should really be equivalent to a non-editable field that
>>gets s
Robert Wittams wrote:
> both auto_now and auto_now_add are quite hackish little puppies.
>
> auto_now should really be equivalent to a _pre_save that sets the field
> to the current time.
>
> auto_now_add should really be equivalent to a non-editable field that
> gets set to the current time on in
both auto_now and auto_now_add are quite hackish little puppies.
auto_now should really be equivalent to a _pre_save that sets the field
to the current time.
auto_now_add should really be equivalent to a non-editable field that
gets set to the current time on insert, and is just statically displ
On 8 dec 2005, at 06.41, Tom Tobin wrote:
On 12/8/05, Daniel Ericsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There seem to be a fix in the new-admin branch -> http://
code.djangoproject.com/changeset/1244
Or, in other words, the current trunk, since new-admin got merged a
little while back. :-)
Your
On 12/8/05, Brett Hoerner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, I'm using the latest svn checkout, at least as of last night, as
> I noted in my first problem post. So, the error with TimeField and
> auto_add* is still there for me.
I guess I got thrown off by Daniel's suggestion; sorry to hear t
Well, I'm using the latest svn checkout, at least as of last night, as
I noted in my first problem post. So, the error with TimeField and
auto_add* is still there for me.
On 12/8/05, Daniel Ericsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There seem to be a fix in the new-admin branch -> http://
> code.djangoproject.com/changeset/1244
Or, in other words, the current trunk, since new-admin got merged a
little while back. :-)
In general, if you're having a problem and you're
On 8 dec 2005, at 06.16, Daniel Ericsson wrote:
On 8 dec 2005, at 04.18, Brett Hoerner wrote:
luminosity in IRC asked if I tried it without
"auto_now_add=True" ... I
tried, and it worked.
So what am I doing wrong with "auto_now_add" here?
I'm not sure you are doing anything wrong. When y
Thanks, so... should this be changed in the Django-svn, or is this some
special functionality I should really need/depend on?
Also, I still think that users should be able to over-ride the values
with auto_add[_now] on ... if they post data that should 'take', if the
field is blank it should do t
On 8 dec 2005, at 04.18, Brett Hoerner wrote:
luminosity in IRC asked if I tried it without
"auto_now_add=True" ... I
tried, and it worked.
So what am I doing wrong with "auto_now_add" here?
I'm not sure you are doing anything wrong. When you set auto_now or
auto_now_add on the TimeField
Ah, well... I've realized by messing around that "auto_now_add" assumes
you aren't even going to display it. I was assuming that it would
auto_add if you left it blank ... woops yet again. I think that would
be nice though, or at least clear that up in the Docs, unless I missed
something. :P
luminosity in IRC asked if I tried it without "auto_now_add=True" ... I
tried, and it worked.
So what am I doing wrong with "auto_now_add" here?
By the way, someone noted that I was using "time" and "date" - both
reserved words. Woops. Well, I changed them to "time_posted",
"date_posted", etc, and I still get the same error.
KeyError at /admin/blog/posts/add/
"Could not find Formfield or InlineObjectCollection named 'time_posted'"
14 matches
Mail list logo
