Re: Django runfcgi umask: what is it meant to do and why?

[Karen Tracey]

git blame on the line that sets the umask shows it was as a result of
ticket #6994:

https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6994

Discussion in that ticket is probably the best information you are going to
get on rationale.

Karen

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Django runfcgi umask: what is it meant to do and why?

[Juan Luis Boya]

Hello people.

I was wondering what runfcgi's umask argument is meant to do. When I first 
met it I though it would set the permissions mask for my fcgi socket. 
runfgi's help told another thing instead:

umask to use when daemonizing, in octal notation (default 022).

And it is right. That's what it does. When daemonize=false, it will set the 
umask for Django child processes, effectively changing default permissions 
for newly created files, including the socket. When daemonize=true, it will 
do nothing.

What sense makes that? Is there any case in where I would like my Django 
process umask to be different when I run it in the background than when I 
run it on the foreground? I can't think of any. Is there even any logical 
reason for the default umask for new files setting to be a runfcgi argument?

On the other hand, I feel a flagrant miss: I need to set the permission 
mask just for my socket, not for other files. I want my web server being 
run as a different user and I want it to be able to write on the socket, 
but not to overwrite uploaded files, for example. I am not entirely alone. 
There are questions like this in StackOverflow [1], in this list [2], in 
the IRC logs [3] and I would bet there is many people suffering it in 
silence.

>From my point of view, this is what runfcgi should tell in the help and do 
about umask:

UNIX socket umask, in octal notation (default 022)

And in fact, this is really easy to get. Just go to 
django/core/servers/fastcgi.py and change line 172 which looks like this:

daemon_kwargs['umask'] = int(options['umask'], 8)

To this:

wsgi_opts['umask'] = int(options['umask'], 8)

And done! Now it will have exactly the -- from my point of view -- sensible 
behaviour. The socket will be created with the specified umask and other 
files created from Django, like uploaded files, will remain with their 
default umask. It's so easy to fix and return it to sanity that I almost 
can't believe it's not a covert bug.

I would like to read your thoughts on the matter.

- Juan Luis

[1] http://stackoverflow.com/a/15135644/1777162
[2] 
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/django-developers/umask/django-developers/XVlh-uF-ffE/tFYAQVLyK1QJ
[3] http://django-irc-logs.com/search/?q=umask

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: ANNOUNCE: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

[Russell Keith-Magee]

On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:

> On 29 juin 2013, at 20:35, Hannu Krosing  wrote:
>
> > Is there any hope to get https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6148
> > integrated int 1.6 ?
> >
> > This is about using schemas in databases which support them well enough
> > (PostgreSQL, Oracle, …)
>
> Since it's a new feature, and since the ticket hasn't seen any activity in
> months, that's very unlikely, sorry.
>
>
Completely unlikely, actually -- since it's a new feature, and the beta
marks the point where we feature freeze the 1.6 release.

It's a possibility for 1.7 -- but only if somebody contributes a patch that
addresses the issues raised in the ticket.

Yours,
Russ Magee %-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: ANNOUNCE: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

[Aymeric Augustin]

On 29 juin 2013, at 20:35, Hannu Krosing  wrote:

> Is there any hope to get https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6148
> integrated int 1.6 ?
> 
> This is about using schemas in databases which support them well enough
> (PostgreSQL, Oracle, …)

Since it's a new feature, and since the ticket hasn't seen any activity in
months, that's very unlikely, sorry.

-- 
Aymeric.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: ANNOUNCE: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

[Hannu Krosing]

On 06/28/2013 03:48 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Hi folks --
>
> I'm pleased to announce that we've just released Django 1.6 beta 1,
> the second in our series of preview releases leading up to Django 1.6
> (due in August).
>
> More information can be found on our blog:
>
>  
>   https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2013/jun/28/django-16-beta-1-released/
>
> And in the release notes:
>
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/1.6/
Is there any hope to get https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/6148
integrated int 1.6 ?

This is about using schemas in databases which support them well enough
(PostgreSQL, Oracle, ...)

Hannu Krosing

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Supported Python versions for Django 1.7

[Florian Apolloner]

Hi,

On Friday, June 28, 2013 4:17:22 PM UTC+2, Aymeric Augustin wrote:
>
> As far as I can tell, there's a consensus on dropping support for Python 
> 2.6. That will allow us to remove the vendored copy of unittest2 and to 
> take advantage of datastructures introduced in Python 2.7 like OrderedDict. 
>

Oh yes, getting rid of our vendored unittest2 is totally worth it 
(debugging failures when someone imports from below django.utils.unittest2 
is no fun)!

Cheers,
Florian

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Supported Python versions for Django 1.7

[Aymeric Augustin]

On 29 juin 2013, at 02:58, Ed Marshall  wrote:

> RHEL7 beta (which, as luck would have it, should also ship with Python 3.3) 
> won't land until end of year, at the earliest; I'd expect CentOS and SL to 
> lag behind that a bit.

Which is perfectly timely: Django 1.7 will land roughly at that time. That's 
the reason why I think it's time to raise the minimum requirement to Python 2.7.

-- 
Aymeric.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.