On 12/07/2014 04:37 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> For my money, the role of this policy change isn't to introduce
> instability into Django's process. The role is to give us permission to
> introduce features which we might not otherwise land (or might delay in
> landing) due to fears over wheth
On 12/07/2014 04:37 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> To my mind, the role of this new status is closer to "provisional",
> rather than "experimental". It's a recognition of the fact that no
> matter how many times we ask for pre-release testing, the first *real*
> test of any API is when it sees re
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Michael Manfre wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <
> russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote:
>
>> * The corollary of this last point is that the release *before* a stable
>> release can't have any experimental/provisional features.
>>
>
> D
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> * The corollary of this last point is that the release *before* a stable
> release can't have any experimental/provisional features.
>
Does this mean that there should be no experimental/provisional features
in an LTS?
Regards,
Mich
Hi all,
Here is this week's report. You can see a more readable version of
this report at
https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoFellows/BerkerPeksag#Weekof2014-12-01
Pull requests
= Authored =
* [Committed] https://github.com/django/django/pull/3671 -- Fixed "no
such test
On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Shai Berger wrote:
> I like the general idea of experimental API, although Carl and Aymeric's
> notes
> are important: If we do this, we need to very picky in its use, or else it
> just becomes an easy route to avoid committment. In particular, there
> should
> be
I like the general idea of experimental API, although Carl and Aymeric's notes
are important: If we do this, we need to very picky in its use, or else it
just becomes an easy route to avoid committment. In particular, there should
be a hard-and-fast rule that nothing should be made an "experimen
+1 to everything you said, if someone wants a "websafe" representation,
they can always just manually call safe_uuid on the UUID instance.
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 6:00:58 PM UTC+1, Michael Manfre wrote:
>
> A non-standard, compressed unique value is not a UUID. Also, this forces
> database
