Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-09 Thread Vinay Sajip
On Dec 9, 11:32 am, reg...@messir.net wrote: > As I understood logging support for django is complete now. Or not? Not as far as I'm aware. Simon Willison has some experimental code on GitHub AFAIK, and there's ticket 12012 tracking that implementation. Regards, Vinay Sajip -- You received t

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-09 Thread Jacob Kaplan-Moss
Okay, I've not heard any voices requesting that we push the release. So we're still on the same schedule. Let's do it! Jacob -- 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...@googlegroup

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-09 Thread Tobias McNulty
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > Additionally, a few features are in or close to last-call stage > (multidb and the smarter if tag). You can add the messages framework to the list of features that will be in Real Soon. Cheers, Tobias -- Tobias McNulty Caktus Consulting

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-09 Thread reg_gc
> So the question is: given what we've got done, and guess at what we > will get done, is the current timeline still feasible, or should we > push the timeline? As I understood logging support for django is complete now. Or not? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-07 Thread Russell Keith-Magee
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > Hi folks -- > > According to our timeline, we're at (a bit past, actually) the point > where we need to take a quick look at progress towards 1.2 and decide > whether the current timeline still makes sense. > > Right now, we've completed 4

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-07 Thread Jacob Kaplan-Moss
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote: > Perhaps I missed the gripping conclusion, but wasn't there some > outstanding work to be done on multi-db's interaction with admin? The conclusion was that we could (and should, eventually) make it easier (perhaps a `using` option on ModelAdmi

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-07 Thread Alex Gaynor
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Jeremy Dunck wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > >> I'm very confident that multi-db will be ready for merge by then, >> Justin and I (ok mostly Justin) have been working on the GIS stuff, >> which is the last blocker. > > Perhaps I m

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-07 Thread Jeremy Dunck
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > I'm very confident that multi-db will be ready for merge by then, > Justin and I (ok mostly Justin) have been working on the GIS stuff, > which is the last blocker. Perhaps I missed the gripping conclusion, but wasn't there some outstandin

Re: Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-07 Thread Alex Gaynor
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > Hi folks -- > > According to our timeline, we're at (a bit past, actually) the point > where we need to take a quick look at progress towards 1.2 and decide > whether the current timeline still makes sense. > > Right now, we've completed 4

Django 1.2 progress assessment

2009-12-07 Thread Jacob Kaplan-Moss
Hi folks -- According to our timeline, we're at (a bit past, actually) the point where we need to take a quick look at progress towards 1.2 and decide whether the current timeline still makes sense. Right now, we've completed 4.5 features on the 1.2 priority list: * Comment admin actions (Co