On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Jerome Leclanche <adys...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm guessing it's the standard way to do things and this may be a bit > offtopic but still, out of curiousity, since the PendingDepWarning is > not visible by default doesn't this actually give the users just the > illusion of more time to fix their code?
That's the pessamistic version, yes. I prefer to think of it like this: Django 1.2 ships. Users read the release notes, and notice that psycopg1 is now deprecated and will be removed. It's still there, and still supported, so they can upgrade quickly and not have to be stuck on 1.1. Django 1.3 ships. Now, using psycopg1 spews ugly error messages to the console and Apache's error logs. But psycopg1 still works, so users can upgrade immediately and get around to fixing the ugly warning messages at their leisure. Django 1.4 ships. Those who've ignored both the release notes and the error messages over the last year (or more) get what they deserve. The main point is this: upgrading from Django 1.N to Django 1.N++ should be a no-brainer. We want our users to upgrade as quickly as possible: this makes our jobs as maintainers *much* easier. To encourage upgrades, we make them easy. This means long deprecation schedules, and it means gradually working up to things. Jacob -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
