On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How would the community around here feel about a beta/pre-release .95
> version?
>
Adrian mentioned doing one at OSCON. See this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers/browse_thread/thread/75c0a1d3703ab81/
Cheers,
deryck
--
Deryck
Waiting
When are y'all going to get off your asses and get finished with the
god damn .95 release cocks ...
My company is thinking about writing our own CMS plugin for rails if
django can't make it to a stable release.
Bennett stop being a fluff and rap this shit up.
--~--~-~--~~--
I saw this post, but I wasn't sure a consensus had been reached.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
Joe wrote:
> I saw this post, but I wasn't sure a consensus had been reached.
I thought simonslaw summed it up pretty nicely.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to t
Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> Release management is a little more faceted than that. You do understand
> that any Open Source project has multiple releases, right? Putting out
> periodic releases to act as checkpoints, regardless of whether it is the
> ultimate, be-all-and-end-all release has benef
On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wonder, then, why .95 has been held off so long.
Hey Joe,
There's no real reason, other than the fact that the core developers
all use (and are happy with) the Subversion/development versions of
Django, with which we've been enjoying the great chang
Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I wonder, then, why .95 has been held off so long.
>
> Hey Joe,
>
> There's no real reason, other than the fact that the core developers
> all use (and are happy with) the Subversion/development versions of
> Django, with whi
On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey, I'm with you 100%. I would use the development version if I
> could. Unfortunately, my project manager thinks 'development' means
> 'broken'. You know how those pesky project managers can be :)
I don't think it's an issue of "brokeness" so muc
On 7/27/06, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> People run svn update at
> different times and all that jazz. I know we've been burned once or
> twice by people running different versions of django.
Two-phase email? "I'd like to svn up, report back when ready."
Or, if too large a team, c
On 7/27/06, Jeremy Dunck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Two-phase email? "I'd like to svn up, report back when ready."
>
> Or, if too large a team, cron'd switchtower/capistrano task?
Heh, I'm not saying it's not doable. It is a pain in the neck though,
and is alleviated by a point release. I i
On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> >
> > There's no real reason, other than the fact that the core developers
> > all use (and are happy with) the Subversion/development versions of
> > Django, with which we've been enjoying the great changes to Django
> > over
Tom Tobin wrote:
> In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
> process. If you can understand that the development version is stable
> enough to use, but your project manager can't, your project manage
On Jul 27, 2006, at 1:05 PM, Joe wrote:
> Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
>> Release management is a little more faceted than that. You do
>> understand
>> that any Open Source project has multiple releases, right? Putting
>> out
>> periodic releases to act as checkpoints, regardless of whether it
On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Tom Tobin wrote:
> > In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> > this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
> > process. If you can understand that the development version is stable
> > enough to
On 7/27/06, Tom Tobin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tom Tobin wrote:
> > > In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> > > this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
> > > process. If you can u
Tom Tobin wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
> process. If you can understand that the development version is stable
> enough to use, but y
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tom Tobin wrote:
> > On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> > this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
> > process. If you can understand that the development vers
On 7/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Tom Tobin wrote:
> > On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> > this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
> > process. If you can u
> Cmon now, keep it clean.
I would love to keep it clean.
But there are people out there like Todd and Tom got are doing their
back to front action at their local vocational high school.
Dear Todd and Tom
Are you threatening me?
Please do put me on your kill list.
Commen sense is over your od
On Jul 27, 2006, at 3:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tom Tobin wrote:
>> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
>> this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
>> process. If you can understand
Todd O'Bryan wrote:
> On Jul 27, 2006, at 3:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Tom Tobin wrote:
> >> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> >> this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
>
On 7/27/06, Todd O'Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Read about agile development. You can release stable code without
> freezing it.
I guess it depends on the definition of "stable." I agree that you
can have code that runs and runs well without freezing it. At some
point though, you gotta b
Todd O'Bryan wrote:
> On Jul 27, 2006, at 3:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Tom Tobin wrote:
> >> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> In line with other sentiments I've expressed here in the past: IMHO,
> >> this means your *project manager* is addled, not Django's release
>
Tyson Tate wrote:
>
> [...] If you can't handle using an in-development framework that's
> improving by the hour [...] see it become the best web
> application framework in the world
> -Tyson
Very ambitious words there, Tyson. While I can agreeably forsee Django
eventually maturing into a great
On 7/27/06, Matt the Destroyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does Django improve if everyone's out for lunch?
I think that depends on whether we're all friends here. I certainly
think about Django over lunch often.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message b
Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Matt the Destroyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Does Django improve if everyone's out for lunch?
>
> I think that depends on whether we're all friends here. I certainly
> think about Django over lunch often.
GAYY!!!
BTW Jocab good one banning t
Regardless of the merits of the issue, it certainly doesn't help things
to get personal.
If you want to influence the process, stay cool and keep the emotional
attacks off the table.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to th
I for one would like a 0.95 release.why?I think 0.95 is stable enough *as is*. sure it's not perfect, (thats what 0.96 is for ;-) but I would like people to stop using 0.91 ASAP.and personally I think trying to get a monthly release, or a release just before something major happens is a good idea.
On 28/07/2006, at 7:56 AM, Tyson Tate wrote:On 7/27/06, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I for one would like a 0.95 release. ...Earlier today:On 7/27/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:... We're working on the .95 release as I typethis, though.Adrianyeah.. I saw that.but the other
On 7/27/06, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> perfect is what 1.0 is for.
I certainly hope this isn't the case. It'd kill me to see django get
caught up with the mythical 1.0 that seems to plague so many OSS
projects.
--
Kevin
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You
Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> People run svn update at
>> different times and all that jazz. I know we've been burned once or
>> twice by people running different versions of django.
>
> Two-phase email? "I'd like to svn up, report back when ready.
Tom Tobin wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Adrian Holovaty wrote:
>>> There's no real reason, other than the fact that the core developers
>>> all use (and are happy with) the Subversion/development versions of
>>> Django, with which we've been enjoying the great changes to D
I'm pretty late on this, but for the record...
...while I totally appreciate that you're reading my blog and you value
what I think, the truth is that my feelings on the matter are almost
completely irrelevant. When to release a build is entirely up to
Adrian, Jacob, and the other core developers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm pretty late on this, but for the record...
>
> ...while I totally appreciate that you're reading my blog and you value
> what I think, the truth is that my feelings on the matter are almost
> completely irrelevant. When to release a build is entirely up to
> Adrian,
On 7/29/06, Bill de hÓra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe the Ubuntu people have it right; stop using version numbers. You
> could probably tag the trunk tonight, call it "django-nuages" and have
> 10k downloads by Monday.
Probably :)
But recent activiy on the timeline looks encouraging for a
It'd be nice if .95 would take care of at least *some* of the bugs
that have been piling up in Trac. I understand the few who have commit
access are insanely busy, but I just can't fathom a .95 release with
the current state of trunk. (Whatever happened to the bug-fix sprint?)
It's a little dishe
On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 08:36 -0700, Tyson Tate wrote:
> It'd be nice if .95 would take care of at least *some* of the bugs
> that have been piling up in Trac. I understand the few who have commit
> access are insanely busy, but I just can't fathom a .95 release with
> the current state of trunk.
O
On 7/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> When you talk all I hear is poop hitting a toilet.
...
> astablished
...
> use there nightly build it a production
> enviroment?
...
> last nights kernal build
...
> If you have ever worked on a non-kiddy project (ie $$$) you will
> unde
On 7/27/06, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I for one would like a 0.95 release.
...
Earlier today:
On 7/27/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> We're working on the .95 release as I type
> this, though.
>
> Adrian
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Y
39 matches
Mail list logo
