On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 01:28:54PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On 02/21/2014 01:14 PM, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:36:24AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> +1 I still have an application that is slowly moving to 1.5 but
>> not there yet and it is painful to have to keep an older Fedora
>> Version running just because of that.
> I hear you! My current plan would be, to provide at least a
> python-django-1.5 version.
My suggestion would actually be that Fedora releases should ship ONLY
with the latest supported upstream version and should be allowed to
pick up the next one during its supported lifecycle.
Hmm, looking at larger Django applications included in Fedora.
Askbot: still requires exclusively Django-1.4, does not work with later
OpenStack-Dashboard: supports Django-1.4, 1.5, Django-1.6 support is
in the development branch, release will be in April
ReviewBoard: you already mentioned, Django-1.6 support is in
I'm sure, I forgot something important.
Ideally, we'd provide the same versions on EPEL and on Fedora. If we'd
try to prevent breaking older applications, Django packages have to
carry the version in their name. At least, this enables us to pick
new upstream releases, when they come out, without breaking anything.
Now, EPEL on the other hand gets even more troubling, since it has a
much longer lifecycle...
Yes, and I'm very twofold here: on one hand, I see
folks asking for
upgrades as quick as possible, and on the other hand, people complain,
if their unsupported version really gets deprecated.
One other approach we might consider (though this is not currently an
FPC-approved solution) would be to package Django as a software
collection and all Django apps would depend on the appropriate
collection. Since the 1.5 and 1.6 collections could coexist on the
system, when an app updates to support the new one, it needs only
change its Requires: to use the newer Django collection and it should
Now, that's forbidden by policy at this point, but maybe we could at
least experiment with this in a COPR repository for the time being. It
would be nice to be able to come to the FPC with a working setup and
ask them to bless it for us, rather than presenting them a problem
statement and hoping that they can find a consensus.
I like the should just work
idea/target :-) and I think I need to
experiment with different builds here, to see if something brings us
nearer to a solution.
Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de>