Good point. I'll get a proper DEP draft written up for next week and then
we can comment on it directly with more substance - it sounds like the idea
of having one is popular, though, which is what I mainly wanted to check!
Andrew
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
> I'm a big
I'm a big fan of pulling things into github.com/django. One other point
which has been raised when I've mentioned this before is the role of the
django fellow(s) with regards to these projects. This should at least be
touched on in the DEP.
On 11 May 2016 at 20:34, William Hakizimana wrote:
> Ju
Just wanted to thank you so much for your hard work. The documentation is
really well written!
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016, at 1:29:34 PM UTC-5, Andrew Godwin wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
> wrote:
>
>> I like this, and +1 on your rough outline.
>>
>> There i
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote:
> I would be inclined to merely mark it as deprecated and not drop it from
> e.g. the GitHub org, though, as where would we move it *to*?
>
Sure, that's fine with me too. The key point is just that we're not
(implicitly or explicitly) offerin
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss
wrote:
> I like this, and +1 on your rough outline.
>
> There is one missing thing here though: I think we need to consider the
> process/policy for removing things if they're no longer maintained. Without
> clear maintainership forks happen, wh
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Carl Meyer wrote:
>
> I'm not quite sure what this means. By "major release" here, you mean
> "major release of the adopted project," not "major release of Django"?
> So this means that security fixes for the adopted project will be
> provided as patch releases o
I like this, and +1 on your rough outline.
There is one missing thing here though: I think we need to consider the
process/policy for removing things if they're no longer maintained. Without
clear maintainership forks happen, which is bad for pretty much everyone.
So I think we should have a plan
On 05/10/2016 08:58 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote:
> Following my decision to move Channels away from a 1.10 merge and
> towards an existence as a separate app for a bit while it matures, I
> would like to write up a process DEP for how we achieve this -
> specifically, what it takes to be adopted as a n
Hi everyone,
Following my decision to move Channels away from a 1.10 merge and towards
an existence as a separate app for a bit while it matures, I would like to
write up a process DEP for how we achieve this - specifically, what it
takes to be adopted as a non-core app, what that means for the Dj
