Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

Hi, > Anyway as long as Django is installed in a virtualenv this shouldn't be > too much of an issue, but I think we should expect some issues from the > users and these should be documented otherwise people might get > frustrated. It can still be an issue for things that share the same virtualen

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 1:31 AM, Sylvain Fankhauser > wrote: > > The only problem I can see is dependencies conflicts, where Django would need > package X version > 1.0 and another installed package would need package X > version 0.9. I have this issue with a project of mine that required six >=

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

> On Apr 7, 2016, at 8:20 AM, Erik Cederstrand > wrote: > > >> Den 6. apr. 2016 kl. 13.42 skrev Marc Tamlyn : >> >> Does anyone (potentially from OS packaging worlds maybe) have a good reason >> NOT to have a dependency? > > Here is a list off the top of my head. This is not necessarily an

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

> Den 6. apr. 2016 kl. 13.42 skrev Marc Tamlyn : > > Does anyone (potentially from OS packaging worlds maybe) have a good reason > NOT to have a dependency? Here is a list off the top of my head. This is not necessarily an argument against dependencies, just some things to consider. 1: Avail

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

The only problem I can see is dependencies conflicts, where Django would need package X version > 1.0 and another installed package would need package X version 0.9. I have this issue with a project of mine that required six >= 1.10 and for some reason Xcode on OSX with the system Python (ie. not i

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

Does anyone (potentially from OS packaging worlds maybe) have a good reason NOT to have a dependency? In the event that Django does have Pip dependencies, I still think we should establish some rules. Things like they should be stable and mature, and perhaps widely known, and still be under active

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

Adding dependencies would definitely be a huge step forward. I think Django doesn't have them because pip wasn't as awesome as it is today back in the early days, but nowadays it would definitely make sense. That would mean a bit more work for distribution package maintainers but if we can start co

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

+1 to allowing dependencies. For multipledispatch, I'd like to first verify the following items: 1. Does the author consider the API for multipledispatch stable? 2. Are the rules in multipledispatch what we want? If we vendor it, we can easily change the matching rules. On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 3:58:09 PM UTC+2, Donald Stufft wrote: > > Without looking at this specific thing too closely, maybe it’s time for > Django to gain a required dependency instead of bundling or reinventing > everything? > +I_do_not_know_how_much -- You received this message beca

Re: Vendoring multipledispatch

> On Apr 4, 2016, at 7:50 AM, Michał 'Khorne' Lowas-Rzechonek > wrote: > > So, I think I'm left with two options: reinvent > https://pypi.python.org/pypi/multipledispatch, or import that into > django.utils along with the license etc. > Without looking at this specific thing too closely, ma

Vendoring multipledispatch

Hi, On last DjangoCon sprints I started working on ticket #26355 , WIP is at https://github.com/django/django/pull/6395. During the implementation I've realized that I need a double-dispatch mechanism for registering overloaded operators. Current ap