On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 2:04 PM Shai Berger <s...@platonix.com> wrote: > Why? Why is 10 years ok where 7 are not? James' points on this are spot > on. > > Be that as it may, I can see sense in the request for a longer > warned-deprecation period, which the current path does not offer. I > would be ok with introducing now the RemovedInDjango41 or even > RemovedInDjango50 warning, and waiting a couple more releases (for > comparison, Python usually deprecates and removes in two versions, not > three like Django).
Not to be contrarian, but I can come right back here with "why is removal in 5.0 OK but removal in 4.0 isn't". Under the current removed-in-4.0 plan, people will get *six* Django feature releases from the time re_path was introduced to the time url() goes away. Any argument for extending it to nine is also an argument for extending it to twelve, fifteen, eighteen, and so on. At some point we have to decide whether we can remove things or not. I think we can and should, and I still don't see why url() needs this kind of special treatment when all the other deprecations we do every LTS-to-LTS cycle don't. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAL13Cg_gJ1MXRFZgMF77ciDVF5A_0P2vJbKqXafRVP6S0Zxg6w%40mail.gmail.com.
