On Thursday 21 January 2016 09:59:49 Aymeric Augustin wrote: > > On 21 janv. 2016, at 07:24, Josh Smeaton <josh.smea...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I'm in favour of making the change, just call it out as a backwards > > compatibility. > > If I understand correctly, Oracle users encountering this issue would just > have to adjust the field length? >
If their field is short enough to begin with. There's a hard limit of 4000 bytes; if they need more, they'll need to change from a charfield with Tim's validator to a TextField, and that, in turn, will also force them to change queries with grouping in non-trivial ways. Shai.
