> On Jun 23, 2015, at 17:24, Aymeric Augustin > <aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote: > > I'm against making changes to the version numbers we've already planned for > and also against 1.10, 1.11 etc. version numbers. > > Such numbers can easily break version checks that don't expect this case. > There's lots of code in the wild with version checks, some of which will > probably behave incorrectly.
I'm not very sympathetic to code that relies on undefined behaviours, especially when people have 2 releases to prepare for the change. We'd properly document it in the 1.10 release notes. > Besides, honestly, 1.10 is just ugly :-) I don't really see anything wrong with 1.10+ versions but maybe that's because this scheme is commonplace in libraries that I've used. The 2.0 and 2.1 exceptions to the new policy are even uglier to me and already introduced a fair amount of confusion to people reviewing the proposals. Also I really like that Django 2.0 would coincide with dropping support for Python 2. That's most certainly the biggest backwards incompatibility we'll ever have :) -- Loïc -- 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/76292589-2340-46DB-BB4D-F38414332B2D%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
