-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 02/28/2013 02:16 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Thu 28 Feb 2013 06:58:36 AM EST, Matthias Runge wrote:
> Dear list,
> Django 1.5 was released about two days ago. I'd like to push a
> build to rawhide, but I assume, that will break many dependent
> The plan is, to delay the push, until other packages are fixed,
> or to push in about 14 days.
> I have a scratch-build build ready, one might to try, it should
> install cleanly e.g. on Fedora 18.
How many Django-based packages are we talking about? Should we be
considering putting things together in a side tag before landing
Well, looking at my list of ~40 python-django packages, I know by
coincidence just a single package to be compatible with Django-1.5
Looking at the release notes, there is a sizeable number of
backwards-incompatible changes present in this new version. I
think it's going to bite us if we force it straight into Rawhide at
this point. Given the way that Django tends to operate
(backwards-incompatible releases about every six months with only
the current and previous release supported for bugfixes and
security), I'm wondering if we shouldn't just drop the
'python-django' package entirely and go with 'python-django14',
'python-django15', etc. from here until eternity, retiring
unsupported versions only between upstream releases. This is a
policy that would probably also work acceptably for EPEL (CCed).
That seems to be a
good proposal for me. Review request is here,
based on the current python-django package. Shouldn't be an issue.
For EPEL, we have the Django14 package. This shouldn't change there,
but we can think about introducing provides: python-django14 there.
Also, IMHO the number of incompatible changes became less and less
disruptive in the past, and I see this as maturing of the project.
Also, Django 1.5's release notes indicate that it now has
support for Python 3.2 and later. I'd strongly recommend that we
should be dual-building python3-django15 as well here.
Yes, I was thinking about a python3-django feature for F20, as it's
absolutely too late for this as a feature for F19, right?
As there is at least /usr/bin/django-admin provided by the package, we
should decide, if that should be coming from the python3 package, if
the python3 version should carry a python3 (or just a 3) in it's name,
or what to do else.
Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----