We've made the first release on the way to Django's next major release,
Django 1.9! With two and a half months until the scheduled final release,
we'll need timely testing from the community to ensure an on-time and
stable release. Check out the blog post:
All known issues are resolved. I plan to create the branch and make the
release in about 4 hours if nothing else pops up.
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 9:46:40 AM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> I'm okay with deferring it. I'll see if we can release the alpha later
> today then. I found one
I'm with Tom here.
Forcing `max_length` to always be set on CharField feels like the right
decision. Having a default there seems unnecessary obscure, and more likely
to lead to untested/unnoticed failure cases.
It *could* be that we'd allow `max_length=None` to explicitly turn off the
I'm okay with deferring it. I'll see if we can release the alpha later
today then. I found one regression in the unreviewed ticket queue this
morning and submitted a pull request. I'm also investigating a possible
regression causing the djangoproject.com tests to fail.
On Wednesday, September
I did not fully follow the discussion, but by the amount of email
notifications I got on that PR if feels to me that deferring it to 1.10
would be the better option, also considering what Tom said about this being
part of a core component and it has to be done right.
/Markus
On Wednesday,
To back that up I'll make a formal commitment to helping review & ensure
completion of the PR if it *does* get deferred to 1.10.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this
Given that it addresses such a core component I'd probably rather see it
deferred to 1.10.
I'd hope that doesn't affect the motivation of the author (it's a fiddly
bit of work to get right and its good to see it being addressed) but from
my point of view it'd be better to see it really
On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 2:25:50 AM UTC+2, Russell Keith-Magee
wrote:
>
> For me, it depends on how close Florian et al think the patch is. If
> it's "close, but a few things need to be tweaked", then option 2 or 3
> sounds good to me. A couple of days won't make much difference in
Hi Shai,
interprets_empty_strings_as_null is set to False
Regards,
Jose
On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:39:14 PM UTC+5:30, Shai Berger wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 22 September 2015 09:39:17 Jose Paul wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I am trying to run DJango 1.8 test cases with DB2
> >
> >
> >
Hi Shai,
interprets_empty_strings_as_null is set to False
Regards,
Jose
On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:39:14 PM UTC+5:30, Shai Berger wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 22 September 2015 09:39:17 Jose Paul wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I am trying to run DJango 1.8 test cases with DB2
> >
> >
> >
10 matches
Mail list logo
