Re: Serve a tracking pixel via Django

2011-04-07 Thread Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]
+1 vote for option 5. On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Adam Nelson wrote: > > On Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:56:44 PM UTC-4, Javier Guerra wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Russell Keith-Magee >> wrote: >> > Sure. Write a view that returns the content. It's 3 lines of code (a >> > cou

Re: Serve a tracking pixel via Django

2011-04-01 Thread Adam Nelson
On Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:56:44 PM UTC-4, Javier Guerra wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Russell Keith-Magee > wrote: > > Sure. Write a view that returns the content. It's 3 lines of code (a > > couple more if you count imports and whitespace). Added bonus -- it's > > actually mor

Re: Serve a tracking pixel via Django

2011-03-31 Thread Javier Guerra Giraldez
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > Sure. Write a view that returns the content. It's 3 lines of code (a > couple more if you count imports and whitespace). Added bonus -- it's > actually more efficient than serve(), because it doesn't impose a disk > access overhead ever

Re: Serve a tracking pixel via Django

2011-03-31 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Adam Nelson wrote: > We have one static file that needs to be served after business logic has run > (i.e. log a view on a specific url based on a unique code).  We used to use > serve() in production.  This has always been frowned upon but with Django > 1.3, the err

Serve a tracking pixel via Django

2011-03-31 Thread Adam Nelson
We have one static file that needs to be served after business logic has run (i.e. log a view on a specific url based on a unique code). We used to use serve() in production. This has always been frowned upon but with Django 1.3, the errors are worse. Can one return an image in any other way?