Yes, thank you David.
On Apr 19, 9:38 am, David Zhou <da...@nodnod.net> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org> > wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 10:19 AM, orokusaki <flashdesign...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> The release of Django 1.0 comes with a promise of API stability and > >> forwards-compatibility. In a nutshell, this means that code you > >> develop against Django 1.0 will continue to work against 1.1 > >> unchanged, and you should need to make only minor changes for the 1.2 > >> release. > > > So you're proposing that 1.2 be the last backwards-compatible release, > > and that 1.3 be incompatible (if necessary) with 1.2? > > I think he's saying that 1.3 will work with 1.2 but not (necessarily) > with 1.1, and 1.2 will work with 1.1 but not (necessarily) with 1.0. > > The specific number of point releases to remain compatible with can > probably be quibbled over, but I think the point is that maintaining > across the entirety of 1.x releases when point releases take this long > can be untenable for good forward momentum. > > -- dz > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
