On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 07:02:31PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > +Konstantin, the kernel.org sysadmin. The context is that patchwork has > just removed (see subject) support for Django 1.6, but I've been told > that RHEL/EPEL7 which you run has only that version, so updating to the > latest patchwork would now be impossible (again)
Hi, Just to throw another datapoint at folks. RHEL-7 has this notion of software collections. It allows customers to update a collection tools to a newer version (RH supported) in the /opt area. Then using a script (which sets env variables), a program can easily use python3 and postgres9.2 on RHEL-7. You can read about it here: https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhscl and talk with your RH account manager about more of the details. You would still need to pip install Django, but at least you could get a newer supported python and postgres on RHEL-7. Not sure how much it helps. Again it was just another datapoint. Cheers, Don > > > We can't support Django 1.4: it's too long in the tooth and has been > > unsupported for too long to even consider. > > It's also ancient and awful compared to newer versions :) > > > So I think we need to answer the following question: > > > > * Are deployers going to install from source/pip? > > I don't really know. Perhaps Konstantin can chime in. > > > If not, then we're going to have (a) roll back the Django 1.6 removal > > patches, (b) put together a roadmap for future Django version support and > > (c) avoid using non-stdlib libraries (outside of Django) going forward. As > > Damien pointed out, these actions come with some rather severe costs for > > us so I'd like to be absolutely certain of this before I take any actions. > > > > There's the obvious alternative of not caring about LTS installations > like kernel.org and simply continue developing the software as is > against upstream. *Eventually*, it's going to get to the users, perhaps > not as fast as the users (like me) would like. > > And I'm not suggesting at all that you should consider "LTS distro" > support of huge importance. > > I think in a way part of the problem is that your user audience is also > developers (in a different space), so we users might be interested in > working on tools improvements ourselves (like the regex auto-delegation > feature that Mauro/Laurent have), but there's less incentive to do that > if we can't actually benefit from it in a fairly short time frame (and > we're more likely to script our way around it instead.) > > johannes > _______________________________________________ > Patchwork mailing list > Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork