David S. schrieb:
> I am finishing up a project built on 0.91 and I am wondering about the various
> patches that have been made to trunk in the meantime. Since magic-removal
> will
> be too backwards-incompatible to use in this project, should I be applying
> important patches (like http://code
On 4/13/06, David S. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am finishing up a project built on 0.91 and I am wondering about the various
> patches that have been made to trunk in the meantime. Since magic-removal
> will
> be too backwards-incompatible to use in this project, should I be applying
> impor
The 0.92/0.95 idea or some variation is good. Today's trunk is quite competant
and should have it's own label before the significant changes the M-R
development will introduce.
With more thanks for all the hard work,
David S.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received
I study django with magic-removal svn,because the magic in 0.91 is so ugly, and i'm developing a real-world application, and so far i don't meet any serious problem. I think magic-removal is stable enough to release. and i think everyone should turn to
0.92(pre-magic-removal).On 4/13/06, Adrian Ho
On 4/13/06, Adrian Holovaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Depending on demand, we may release a final pre-magic-removal release
> of Django -- maybe 0.91.1 or something. Or maybe it'll be 0.92 and
> magic-removal will be 0.95, to signify it's a big leap. Thoughts?
The one thing I am slightly concer
On 4/13/06, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The one thing I am slightly concerned about is the fact that the MR
> branch is lingering and lingering and diverging beyond simply the
> 'magic removal' goal that was set at first.
>
> How many more changes are expected before
On Thursday 13 Apr 2006 6:54 pm, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> Depending on demand, we may release a final pre-magic-removal
> release of Django -- maybe 0.91.1 or something. Or maybe it'll be
> 0.92 and magic-removal will be 0.95, to signify it's a big leap.
> Thoughts?
next release *must* be magic r
On 4/14/06, Kenneth Gonsalves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> next release *must* be magic removal - no point doing any interim
> releases - one drastic piece of surgery and then 1.0 ... interim
> releases would just prolong the agony
I have to agree with Kenneth here.
Any day you prolong the non-MR
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven gmail.com> writes:
> On 4/14/06, Kenneth Gonsalves thenilgiris.com> wrote:
> > next release *must* be magic removal - no point doing any interim
...
> Better to bite the bullet and get this over with.
...
I was thinking simultaneous release. Really just for the s
.
Cheers,
--Tim
-Original Message-
From: django-users@googlegroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David S.
Sent: vrijdag 14 april 2006 17:23
To: django-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Fate of 0.91 projects
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven gmail.com> writes:
> On 4
> On Thursday 13 Apr 2006 6:54 pm, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
>> Depending on demand, we may release a final pre-magic-removal
>> release of Django -- maybe 0.91.1 or something. Or maybe it'll be
>> 0.92 and magic-removal will be 0.95, to signify it's a big leap.
>> Thoughts?
I think your next relea
On 4/14/06, Leeuw van der, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I fully agree with this: a 0.92 made of trunk, with all fixes collected
> on trunk. Perhaps patches applied for concurrency/threading issues and
> memory leaks -- that would be great for stability, esp. on windows.
> Then instantly switch
On 4/14/06, Bill de hÓra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think your next release should be an alpha based on magic-removal not
> an upgrade of .92. Cut your losses.
There has been some commits to the trunk and given how some hosting
parties will not install non-released versions I think it might be
On 4/14/06, Bill de hÓra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simulataneous releases will confuse people and enhance any perception
> that Django is unstable not ready for production work. Parallel branch
> management has really hurt the Zope community for example; there are
> lots of other examples out t
2006/4/14, James Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 4/14/06, Bill de hÓra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Simulataneous releases will confuse people and enhance any perception
> > that Django is unstable not ready for production work. Parallel branch
> > management has really hurt the Zope communi
15 matches
Mail list logo
