On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 6:57 AM, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Adrián Ribao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I think I can make this work in three weeks, If I do, could it be >> considered for Django 1.0? > > Since it appears that it wouldn't introduce any backwards-incompatible > changes, I'd be against putting it on a 1.0 timeline; it could just as > easily be added in a 1.x release afterward.
Also, as I understand it, there isn't consensus in the community about the 'right way' to do this. I haven't been keeping tabs on the very latest developments in these areas, but as I understand it, there are at least two camps that disagree with each other on the right way to put i18n data in the database. This came up during the recent TWID podcast on I18N/L10N; the TWID guys (who are doing a great job, by the way) gave some time to one camp, and apparently got flooded with emails asking why they didn't give the other side the same opportunity. Anything where there is a still a disagreement about the 'right way' to do something is definitely off the table for 1.0. Yours, Russ Magee %-) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@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-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
