Re: Django 2.0 Python version support (Python 3.6+ only?)

2016-12-28 Thread Karen Tracey
On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Claude Paroz wrote: > Any idea why my message in this thread was deleted? > No idea. It was held in moderation as "possible spam" for reason only Google Groups knows. When GG does this, it does not send moderators a note about it until 3 or 4 days later. This one

Re: Django 2.0 Python version support (Python 3.6+ only?)

2016-12-28 Thread Tim Graham
There may be a bug in Google Groups -- I've seen my own messages deleted like that. On Wednesday, December 28, 2016 at 2:41:59 PM UTC-5, Claude Paroz wrote: > > Any idea why my message in this thread was deleted? > > Claude > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: Django 2.0 Python version support (Python 3.6+ only?)

2016-12-28 Thread Claude Paroz
Any idea why my message in this thread was deleted? Claude -- 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-develop

Re: Django 2.0 Python version support (Python 3.6+ only?)

2016-12-28 Thread Aymeric Augustin
> On 28 Dec 2016, at 15:53, Claude Paroz wrote: > > Dropping Python 2 will already be a strong progress and might allow nice > improvements for Django. +1 The Python 3 transition will materialize brutally for many developers when they can’t upgrade Django anymore without upgrading Python as w

Re: Django 2.0 Python version support (Python 3.6+ only?)

2016-12-28 Thread Claude Paroz
I would like to voice my support for Florian's arguments. It's not only RedHat, Debian is also concerned. The current Jessie stable version which will be supported probably until mid-2018 is Python 3.4, and the upcoming stable version will most probably be Python 3.5. So a strong -1 for droppin

Re: Should SECRET_KEY be allowed to be bytes?

2016-12-28 Thread Aymeric Augustin
I’m happy with that. -- Aymeric. > On 27 Dec 2016, at 19:49, Tim Graham wrote: > > Thanks Aymeric. How about this documentation addition: > > Uses of the key shouldn't assume that it's text or bytes. Every use should go > through :func:`~django.utils.encoding.force_text` or > :func:`~django.u