El lunes, 18 de mayo de 2015, 12:33:21 (UTC+2), James Schneider escribió:
>
> I'd post a bug report. Based on the behavior you've outlined (haven't
> looked at the Django source), there may have been some oversight on the
> duck typing that python performs. It sounds like the migration package is
I'd post a bug report. Based on the behavior you've outlined (haven't
looked at the Django source), there may have been some oversight on the
duck typing that python performs. It sounds like the migration package is
taking advantage of duck typing (since 16 == int('16')), but the validation
functio
Yes, it is.
user=> \d+table django_foo;
Table "public.grd_device"
Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target |
Description
++---+--+--+-
id | integer
Hey,
And is the CharField is really 16 char max_length in DB if
you specifiy a string '16'?
On 05/15/2015 10:53 AM, Santiago L wrote:
Hi,
I think that I have found a bug on the system check: it accepts a
string as value for CharField.max_length argument.
It happens only if the string can be
4 matches
Mail list logo
