On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Dennis Kaarsemaker <den...@kaarsemaker.net> wrote: > On ma, 2010-04-05 at 21:47 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > >> The bit that I have been engaging with is the discussion of (and >> apparent misconceptions around) Django's backwards compatibility >> policy, and our policies regarding support for older Python versions. > > And I appreciate that you have done so, thanks! > >> However, even these discussions have limited interest for me unless >> they rapidly converge on a *specific* criticism or problem that >> requires rectification. > > Not a criticism per se, but I am wondering why the next 1.1.x is > released alongside 1.2 instead of as a release on its own. I've yet > again seen a case of python 2.6.5 breaking django tests, so I would > welcome a new release of 1.1.x a bit sooner than 1.2, if only from a > #django support perspective.
The release of 1.2 will be the point at which 1.1 moves into security maintenance mode, so it makes sense that we cut both 1.2 and a 1.1.X release at the same time (to make sure 1.1.X contains as many bug fixes as possible before it moves into maintenance mode). So, there will always be *a* 1.1.X release when we release 1.2 - the only question is whether we release (or at this point, should have released) an interim 1.1.2, and then make 1.1.3 the 'final' 1.1 release? The problem here is that there hasn't been a single time where cutting 1.1.2 was both appropriate, and the importance of cutting an interim release was known. If you take the 1.1 development cycle as a guide, we cut a 1.0 point release when we released 1.1-beta1. However, at the time of 1.2-beta1, the 1.1.X branch didn't actually contain all that much, so there wasn't much point cutting a 1.1.2 release. If we'd cut a release then, It wouldn't have included the fix for the Python 2.6.5 problems you are talking about. Another useful trigger might have been the point at which we passed our original RC date (early March). If we'd cut 1.1.2 then, we would have fixed the 1.1.2 problems - but here, we hit a communication problem. While I was aware that the Python 2.6.5 had problems with 1.1.1 (I fixed the bug, after all), I wasn't really aware that this was a problem in practice for a significant body of users until about a week or so ago. This isn't a blame thing - I'm just pointing out that if there is a recurring problem on IRC support (or django-users for that matter), that doesn't necessarily mean that the core team are also aware of the problem. And even if we are aware of the problem, it doesn't mean we are aware of the scope of the problem, and have made plans to address it. Django has a huge community, and the core team can't be everywhere all the time. We really do rely on the active members of our community to help us identify problems as they emerge. If you're doing your share of the heavy lifting in #django or django-users (and I know you are, Dennis, so a big thanks for that), we're certainly interested in hearing anything that you think will make your life easier. A quick message to django-dev explaining the problem will sometimes be all it takes to set the wheels in motion. So that brings us to the present day -- at this point, we're hopefully just a week or two away from RC, so there isn't much incentive to turn the handle and produce a release, just to turn it again in a couple of weeks for a second release that will only contain minor differences. I know it's a dangerous to start singing 'tomorrow is only a day away', but the time we spend cutting a release only serves to delay the final release of 1.2 a little bit more. I'll freely admit that despite the major improvements landing in 1.2, the development cycle itself hasn't been flawless. Hopefully I've been able to provide some explanation for why things ended up the way they did. So - tl;dr: * Yes, with hindsight, we probably should have cut a 1.1.2 release * We probably should have cut that release somewhere around the start of March * We're close enough to 1.2 that we're not going to cut a 1.1.X release until 1.2-final * Direct feedback from the #django and django-users trenches might have avoided this problem * We'll try to do better next time. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
