On Jun 28, 2006, at 6:07 AM, Gábor Farkas wrote: > what i think we are missing the most is to hear about the "main" > developers (project owners?) (adrian, malcolm, jacob etc.) opinion > about > unicode-ification. if they think we should switch django completely to > unicode, then fine. but if they think that django should still support > bytestrings, i really don't see how we could do the unicode-ification > without breaking backwards compatibility.
In a nutshell: I think it's too much work, with too many backwards- incompatible changes, with too little payoff. Let me expand a bit on each of those points: "Too much work..." -- there's quite a bit that would need to be changed, and a number of sticky problems to be solved. Just one example is the issue of template encodings -- do we need to start indicating that a certain template is UTF-8 or whatever? "... with too many backwards-incompatible changes ..." -- as Hugo points out, this will break a lot of existing code. My experience is that Unicode issues are the worst types of bugs since they only crop up when dealing with particular data. "... with too little payoff." -- right now it's completely possible to nicely handle Unicode data in Django as long as you're careful. Yes, it's not as easy as it might be, but the net result of a Unicode- ification would be an incremental improvement at best. So I think -- for now -- there are more important places to spend our energy. 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-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
