On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Florian Apolloner <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Option (5) sounds great; but if you want backwards compat option (1) > is the only way to go. cache_page isn't the only decorator affected by > this problem; I could imagine there are many decorators in 3rd party > apps which try to alter the response. So the question is how much code > will we break if we not go with option (1) and does the backwards > policy allow that at all?
There are no backwards compatibility concerns here. We're talking about the class-based generic TemplateView. Since that was added in 1.3, there isn't anything to be backwards compatible with. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
