On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:10 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And this is great of course. But having to develop externally away > from the many eyes of the Django community is sort of an impairment. > It's a lot easier to get traction on a project that is in the Django > repo somewhere than to get it for a project on Google Code.
If somebody wants a branch in which to do the work, I wouldn't have any problem setting it up; that's how we did it for Oracle, and merged it back to trunk when it was ready. > No one says the Django team must exhaustively maintain every bit of > code in the repository. Surely it is quite easy to not include MS SQL > in the default list of backends and/or mention in the documentation > that MS SQL support is unsupported and experimental until such time as > it improves. Plenty of projects have bits of code that are crufty and > get labeled as such, and don't burn cycles maintaining it themselves. Having dead, non-functional code in Django is something I'd like to avoid. And there's a world of difference between "here's an experimental feature" and "here's something that was abandoned by the person who developed it, and we don't know much about it". -- "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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
