The recent change to `url()` was a good example of this; even though it was in
a DEP and the docs for a long time it still caused a lot of noise when the
deprecation path was finally started.
The projects (ok, small sample) I've looked at are only now making this change.
Folks will only change
I'd suggest one of the examples from within Django itself - several of them
clear relevant @lru_caches.
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 14:22, '1337 Shadow Hacker' via Django developers
(Contributions to Django itself) wrote:
> disconnect/reconnect signals maybe ?
>
> --
> You received this message becau
Hi all.
Calendar Week 27 -- ending 05 July.
Triaged:
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20081 -- Minimize the risk of
SECRET_KEY leaks (needsinfo)
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/31755 -- make temporal subtraction
work without ExpressionWrapper (Accepted)
https://code.djangoproject
disconnect/reconnect signals maybe ?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googleg
Hello folks,
I want to add a good example of usage for the settings_changed signal to the
documentation:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/signals/#setting-changed
I was looking around the web and it seems there is some confusion around its
proper use, so I’d like to add a good example
>
> I would prefer "one right way to do it", but I also don't see a compelling
> reason to deprecate the old interface.
>
For me, the reason to eventually deprecate the old interface is to help new
developers learning a new codebase. When these developers have been taught
to use response.headers b
All this makes a lot of sense.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.
I'm in favour of retaining and documenting the old interface, with some
kind of sentence pointing at the new one. Carlton posted on the PR that he
felt it was a bit paternalistic to recommend one over the other. I don't
agree, I think it's important to offer some guidance, especially for new or
ret
I guess there is still some debate on how to handle the old interface. I'll
give my opinion, but I want to make it clear I don't mind that much what we
do with it.
When I've seen people learning Django, they come across these magical
strings you somehow add to the response, but aren't content, tha
@Tom looks great, should we add depreciation notices to the
response.__gettitem__/del that way there are no 2 right ways to do things?
I would probably keep it around until 3.2... I personally like the whole
respose.headers it's much more readable.
--
You received this message because you are
I think the PR has everything now and is ready for review:
https://github.com/django/django/pull/13186
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 08:38, Carlton Gibson
wrote:
> Just to be clear:
>
> > I think we should keep the old interface.
>
> I mean as well as adding the new .headers property. (So +1)
> (Sorry
11 matches
Mail list logo
