R. David Murray wrote:
> > So you're still using features deprecated three releases ago, you haven't
> > checked for DeprecationWarnings and it's Django making your life difficult?
> >
> > Why not check for the deprecation warnings?
>
> Doing so makes very little difference.
>
> This is my opin
R. David Murray writes:
> It is the *change itself* that causes
> action to be needed. If a project has a policy of dealing with deprecated
> features when the warnings happen, then they need to do that work before
> the version where the feature is removed is released. If they have
> a pol
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 20:00:14 +0200, Ezio Melotti wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:43 PM, R. David Murray
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:45:29 +0300, Michael Foord
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 22 Aug 2013, at 14:00, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Django's deprecation policy works like t
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Ezio Melotti wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
>>>
>>> Removing some cruft on each release can be very painful for users.
>>>
>>> Django's deprecation policy works li
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:43 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:45:29 +0300, Michael Foord
> wrote:
>>
>> On 22 Aug 2013, at 14:00, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
>> >
>> > Django's deprecation policy works like this: They deprecate something
>> > in version A.B. It still works normally
On Aug 22, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Ezio Melotti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
>>
>> Removing some cruft on each release can be very painful for users.
>>
>> Django's deprecation policy works like this: They deprecate something
>> in version A.B. It still w
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
>
> Removing some cruft on each release can be very painful for users.
>
> Django's deprecation policy works like this: They deprecate something
> in version A.B. It still works normally in A.B+1, generates a
> (silenced) DeprecationWarni
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Michael Foord
wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2013, at 14:00, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
>> Django's deprecation policy works like this: They deprecate something
>> in version A.B. It still works normally in A.B+1, generates a
>> (silenced) DeprecationWarning in A.B+2, and is fina
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 16:45:29 +0300, Michael Foord
wrote:
>
> On 22 Aug 2013, at 14:00, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
>
> > Terry Reedy wrote:
> >> On 8/15/2013 8:29 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> >>
> >>> A number of us (I don't know how many) have clearly been thinking about
> >>> "Python 4" as the ti
Le Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:00:06 +0300,
Petri Lehtinen a écrit :
> Terry Reedy wrote:
> > On 8/15/2013 8:29 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> >
> > >A number of us (I don't know how many) have clearly been thinking
> > >about "Python 4" as the time when we remove cruft. This will not
> > >cause any backw
Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/15/2013 8:29 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
>
> >A number of us (I don't know how many) have clearly been thinking about
> >"Python 4" as the time when we remove cruft. This will not cause any
> >backward compatibility issues for anyone who has paid heed to the
> >deprecatio
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>> > A number of us (I don't know how many) have clearly been thinking about
>> > "Python 4" as the time when we remove cruft. This will not cause any
>> > backward compatibility issue
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:34:12 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/15/2013 8:29 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> > A number of us (I don't know how many) have clearly been thinking about
> > "Python 4" as the time when we remove cruft. This will not cause any
> > backward compatibility issues for anyone w
On 15/08/2013 13:29, R. David Murray wrote:
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
> > We don't have any substantial change in store for an eventual "Python
> > 4", so it's quite a remote h
On 8/15/2013 8:29 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
A number of us (I don't know how many) have clearly been thinking about
"Python 4" as the time when we remove cruft. This will not cause any
backward compatibility issues for anyone who has paid heed to the
deprecation warnings, but will for those wh
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Ezio Melotti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:29 PM, R. David Murray
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
> >> Victor Stinner wrote:
> >> > 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
> >> > >
On 08/15/2013 05:40 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
What we should probably do is have unittest turn deprecations on by default
when running your tests but leave them
silent otherwise. I still think keeping them silent for the benefit of
end-users is a good thing as long as we make it
easier for devel
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:29 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
>> Victor Stinner wrote:
>> > 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
>> > > We don't have any substantial change in store for an eventual "Python
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:29:35 -0400
> "R. David Murray" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
> > > Victor Stinner wrote:
> > > > 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
> > >
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 8:29 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
> > Victor Stinner wrote:
> > > 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
> > > > We don't have any substantial change in store for an eventual "Python
>
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 08:29:35 -0400
"R. David Murray" wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
> > Victor Stinner wrote:
> > > 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
> > > > We don't have any substantial change in store for an eventual "Pyt
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:22:14 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:16:20 +0200
> Victor Stinner wrote:
> > 2013/8/15 Antoine Pitrou :
> > > We don't have any substantial change in store for an eventual "Python
> > > 4", so it's quite a remote hypothesis right now.
> >
> > I prefe
22 matches
Mail list logo
