On Wednesday 09 August 2017 00:40:30 Josh Smeaton wrote:
> We use the explain analyze method at work, but I don't think it's an
> appropriate thing to include in core.
>
Agreed.
> I'm not so sure about providing count estimates in core, but I don't fully
> grok how the `estimate_above` would wor
We use the explain analyze method at work, but I don't think it's an
appropriate thing to include in core.
I agree that these changes should be a function of the paginator and that
being able to pass in a could also be very useful.
I'm not so sure about providing count estimates in core, but I
One platform that only supports up to Python 3.4 ElasticBeanstalk with
Amazon Linux. A few months ago they said they were going to release a new
AMI, but that hasn't happened yet.
I'm personally happy seeing support for 3.4 dropped and possibly just
waiting a few months to upgrade to Django 2.0
One of the biggest gains would be allowing third party packages to begin to
add type hints, if we support 3.4 this won't happen for a while at least.
Other gains, for Django and third party packages include:
- code improvements using unpacking generalizations
- speed improvements with OrderedDict
Is there any list of things we gain from dropping / adding any particular
version?
The older discussion mentions a tracking ticket, but it is empty.
--
C
On 8 August 2017 9:45:54 AM AEST, Tim Graham wrote:
>With a little more than a month to go until the Django 2.0 alpha
>(targeted
>for Septe
Hi Tim,
I've just looked through the list of systems in use here:
* Debian stable: Python 3.5.3
* Ubuntu 16.04 (yes, LTS): 3.5.2
* CentOS 6/7 (and therefore also RHEL): 3.3-3.5 via SCL, 3.3-3.6 via IUS
So all in all dropping 3.4 would be doable. I'd still strongly object to
dropping 3.5.
Ch