I think there is some merit to reconsidering the deprecation schedule as Anssi suggests. What I have seen is that most third-party apps didn't consider dropping support for the previous LTS (1.4) until the next LTS (1.8) was released. This meant that all these projects had to implement their own compatibility shims (instead of using Django's) once they wanted to add support for Django 1.6+ because the compatibility shims for deprecated features in 1.4 were dropped in Django. This resulted in ugly code with lots of conditional version branches, etc. I'll keep thinking about this as we decide the release schedule going forward.
On Thursday, May 7, 2015 at 10:14:34 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote: > > You only get painless upgrades from one LTS to the next *if* you don't > have any deprecation warnings in your code on the previous LTS. Whilst the > "getting it working" step from one LTS direct to the next should be fairly > easy, you're likely to be faced with just as large a set of deprecation > issues on that new LTS issues you would have had to fix to get it working. > This does have some benefit for a quick update for security support or > similar, however I think there's a good chance it will make the *next* LTS > more painful as those warnings will not have been eliminated. > > Then again, I don't work in an LTS environment, and no one has been > working in such a setup with django through several LTS versions to see > what happens. > > On 7 May 2015 at 12:41, Anssi Kääriäinen <akaa...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > >> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Marc Tamlyn <marc....@gmail.com >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> > I'm not sure that would be a wise move - for people who don't keep up >> with >> > deprecation warnings but otherwise move one version at a time it would >> make >> > upgrading from an LTS to the following release 3 times harder than >> normal, >> > encouraging stagnation. >> >> The other side of this coin is that you get painless upgrades to the >> latest LTS from the latest stable version. So, with a bit of >> exaggeration, one could say that our current model encourages >> stagnation to non-LTS versions. >> >> >> - Anssi >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CALMtK1EC%2B9nakK2MjW%2B5mV3Nyt10XbQi2vTw6_WCfDwQ2GQLJQ%40mail.gmail.com >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/7de71cc0-a0fb-4749-8065-8972219b2df9%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
