Re: drop support for MySQL 5.5 in Django 2.0?

As a datapoint for MySQL, Most of my websites are on Ubuntu 16.04 (Python 3.5, MySQL 5.7), though I do have one on 14.04 (Python 3.4, MySQL 5.5) that I _would_ upgrade to Django 2.0 if we kept 5.5 support, but it's not a big deal to leave it at 1.11 until I switch to 16.04. On Sat, Aug 26, 2017

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Is there any more documentation than https://github.com/django/django/pull/7542? It doesn't look very complete: * Release note are missing. * Documentation for url() shouldn't be removed -- as far as I know, there's no plan to deprecate it. It should be as valid alternative (i.e. error messages

Re: drop support for MySQL 5.5 in Django 2.0?

I guess a SQL Server expert will need to interpret https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/sqlnativeclient/2008/02/27/microsoft-sql-server-native-client-and-microsoft-sql-server-2008-native-client/ and say exactly which SQL Server versions require the legacy datetime handling. I see

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi all, Here a minor status update regarding the pull request, and a huge request. I believe the pull request is feature complete. Marten Kenbeek has proposed some changes to the code which I have accepted and merged into the original pull request. The pull request itself can be found at

Re: DEP pre-proposal for a simpler URLs syntax.

Hi John, It's a bit unfortunate that I can't find any trace of your changes. They are probably on your local machine, so I can't see any of the changes you have made or the errors they cause. Do you believe the problems you are running into come from a bug in the path() implementation, not

Re: Align Django admin checkboxes

I believe this is designed so that when there are multiple checkboxes in a line they look like this: On Monday, August 28,

Re: Automatic prefetching in querysets

W dniu środa, 16 sierpnia 2017 14:48:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Luke Plant napisał: > > I completely agree that visibility of this problem is a major issue, and > would really welcome work on improving this, especially in DEBUG mode. One > option might be a method that replaces lazy loads with