On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 11:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have to ask why must Django prevent work in this regard?
To be perfectly fair, it's not really "prevented". Django supports the use of database backends not defined in Django itself, so third-party development of backends is unimpaired. And for the one most people mention wanting -- MS SQL -- I think that's a good idea; that backend has a history of people stepping up, putting in a burst of work and then fading away, leaving the code dead and the Django dev team responsible for maintaining it as long as it's in Django's codebase. What really needs to happen there is much the same as what happened with Oracle: some people who are really clamoring for it need to organize and start pooling their efforts to develop something that can comfortably become a part of Django (and now that external backends are supported and qs-rf made the underlying mechanics of custom Query classes much simpler, anyone wanting to do a new backend probably faces a much easier time of it than the Oracle folks did). Post-1.0, any externally-maintained backend that has a good track record of support and a commitment from a developer to maintain it into the future can easily be considered for integration, but until then such projects should stay external. > I would even consider dropping all but security patches to 0.96. That > is practically the limit of support anyway it seems, and is not likely > to cause much work. Those of us on 0.96 don't expect you to support > our private branches anyway, and maintaining that mess ourselves is a > huge incentive to bite the bullet and upgrade. You also might > consider letting whoever can spare the time apply patches to 0.96 and > do point releases for those people who will stay there forever (and > I'm sure there will be plenty). You lose nothing as long as there are > volunteers willing to do that work. Personally, so long as folks are OK with the fact that it'll only ever get security fixes I'd be happy with setting a time-based official support window for 0.96, after which a community effort can pick it up if desired. At that point I'd imagine it wouldn't be too hard to set up one or two folks with commit access to the 0.96-bugfixes branch for that purpose (and we've had good experience with clients who are on legacy 0.91 Django installs and quite happily just run off a 0.91-bugfixes checkout, which makes pushing security updates to them insanely easy). -- "Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of correct." --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
