Re: Proposal to format Django using black

2019-04-30 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi all, As per the DEP process, I have merged DEP 8, Formatting Code With Black, into the DEP repo as a draft. This doesn't mean it's decided yet - any DEP that meets quality requirements gets merged as a draft - but it means that we're one step closer to doing so. What follows is further

Re: A different approach for the auto-reloader

2019-04-30 Thread Andrew Godwin
>From my read this also looks like it would make the auto-reloader able to work a lot better with an async-capable server, so I would be in favour given that is likely in the future as well. Andrew On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 9:33 PM Ramiro Morales wrote: > Hi all, > > I had a stab at a somewhat

Re: First ASGI pull request is ready for review

2019-04-30 Thread Andrew Godwin
So, it looks like most of the comments on this PR have happened and been resolved - unless anyone has any objections, I will merge it in after a couple more days (just in time for PyCon US). Andrew On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 1:50 PM Andrew Godwin wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Just wante

Re: First ASGI pull request is ready for review

2019-05-01 Thread Andrew Godwin
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:34 PM Mariusz Felisiak < felisiak.mari...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for this patch. Can you add a trac ticket? also Can you give me & > Carlton few days for review? I should be able to do this somewhere in the > next week. > I can indeed. I wasn't sure if you wanted

Re: First ASGI pull request is ready for review

2019-05-01 Thread Andrew Godwin
where people might input. There’s >> massive interest.  >> >> Great work as ever Andrew. Thank you so much! >> >> C. >> >> On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 08:46, Andrew Godwin wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:34 PM Mariu

Re: Resource loading (Django without a filesystem)

2019-06-27 Thread Andrew Godwin
My impression reading over the problem a little yesterday was that we could work to provide a common "get me a resource" abstraction in Django that papers over the couple of different ways it has to work, though I haven't looked super far into things that require directory listing (e.g.

Re: Resource loading (Django without a filesystem)

2019-06-27 Thread Andrew Godwin
x there because the > project controls the "resource" directories and could sprinkle in the > necessary __init__.py files. I filed an issue to start the discussion > there as well, https://bugs.launchpad.net/pytz/+bug/1834363 > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 2:40 PM Andrew Godwi

First ASGI pull request is ready for review

2019-04-24 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi everyone, Just wanted to drop a note and say that the first pull request in the series needed to enable async in Django is now ready for review: https://github.com/django/django/pull/11209 This is a very minimal amount of work to get Django async-safe and understanding ASGI as an application

Re: A Django Async Roadmap

2019-06-25 Thread Andrew Godwin
s looking like? > > CB > > On Friday, 12 April 2019 07:33:35 UTC+1, Shaggy wrote: >> >> and how it is going ? >> is there some interest from django devs? >> >> On Monday, 4 June 2018 15:18:23 UTC+2, Andrew Godwin wrote: >>> >>> Hello eve

Re: Proposing development discussion forums

2019-08-13 Thread Andrew Godwin
, 2019 at 10:10 PM Andrew Godwin wrote: > I agree James - forums tend to age slightly worse than mailing lists for > archival content, but I'm hoping the improved experience in the moment > makes up for it. > > Plus, our current mailing list archive depends on a service from Google

Re: Proposing development discussion forums

2019-08-10 Thread Andrew Godwin
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 3:30 AM Carlton Gibson wrote: > What does it need from Ops? (Is there a `docker run-my-service`? Could we > leverage djangoproject.com (and GitHub) logins, or are they always going > to be separate?) > Markus has done more investigation on how to run it, though my

Re: Proposing development discussion forums

2019-08-09 Thread Andrew Godwin
‪On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:16 PM ‫אורי‬‎ wrote:‬ > Every Google Group also has an online forum: > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/django-developers > Indeed, I am aware of this, I usually use it when I link threads on Twitter. However, it is not really a forum in the sense I am

Re: Proposing development discussion forums

2019-08-12 Thread Andrew Godwin
I agree James - forums tend to age slightly worse than mailing lists for archival content, but I'm hoping the improved experience in the moment makes up for it. Plus, our current mailing list archive depends on a service from Google, and I trust those less these days (though I hope Google

Announcing the Django Forum

2019-09-10 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi all, If you recall, last month I brought up the idea of a Django Forum ( https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/django-developers/HGAHQqKp7rs) - we're now ready to launch this forum in a test phase! You can find it at https://forum.djangoproject.com Like our Trac, it's tied into GitHub

Re: Make Development More Accessible

2019-08-07 Thread Andrew Godwin
We actually discussed this a little at the PyCon AU sprints and the consensus was that GitHub issues would be great *if only they were a bit more featureful*. The problems I feel are specifically an issue: - Ticket states; this is not easily replicated with labels, while components etc. are

Re: Django Websocket Implementation Request

2019-08-01 Thread Andrew Godwin
Unfortunately, from my perspective, websocket support is tricky enough that it's at least not on the short-term plan to bake into Django; it's used by only a small fraction of our users, and the Channels project is an official Django project, so it's as close as we can get so far. Future Django

Re: Translation templatetag aliases

2019-07-27 Thread Andrew Godwin
I agree too. Let's change it. Andrew On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 4:03 AM Markus Holtermann wrote: > Easy: +1 from me as well for reasons state before. > > /Markus > > On Sat, Jul 27, 2019, at 6:15 PM, Adam Johnson wrote: > > +1 from me too for the reasons that Aymeric states. > > > > Another small

Proposing development discussion forums

2019-08-09 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi everyone, This might be slightly controversial, but I would like to propose that we have a forum for discussing Django development (and potentially user support), alongside the mailing list and maybe, eventually replacing it. My full reasoning is below, but in short, it would be more

Re: Django Async DEP

2019-07-21 Thread Andrew Godwin
Andrew On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 9:14 AM Andrew Godwin wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 3:14 AM Pascal Chambon > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> There is something a little scary for me, in changing all the core of >> Django to async, when this really helps only,

Re: Django Async DEP

2019-07-21 Thread Andrew Godwin
, Jul 21, 2019 at 1:02 PM Andrew Godwin wrote: > I'll ask permission and then summarise the points raised back out here! > > Andrew > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 1:01 PM Jacob Kaplan-Moss > wrote: > >> Congratulations, and great news! >> >> I hope the TB will co

Re: Django Async DEP

2019-07-21 Thread Andrew Godwin
uot;; I'll bet there's a bunch the broader community could > learn from the specifics. > > Jacob > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 3:54 PM Andrew Godwin wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> After a long and involved vote, I can announce that the Technical Board >> has vot

Re: Django Async DEP

2019-07-21 Thread Andrew Godwin
On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 1:11 PM Ehigie Aito wrote: > Django 3.0? > Django follows time-based releases; what's in Django 3.0 will depend on when we can get it landed. At the moment I am optimistic something will make it in, but I make no promises! Andrew -- You received this message because

Re: Sounding out for GSoC 2020.

2019-12-14 Thread Andrew Godwin
it would come > in handy for the TB's direction guidance...) > > Kind Regards, > > Carlton > > > On Tuesday, 10 December 2019 19:14:51 UTC+1, Andrew Godwin wrote: >> >> I agree that 2FA could be a good choice - some of the async support work >> would also have bee

Re: Sounding out for GSoC 2020.

2019-12-10 Thread Andrew Godwin
I agree that 2FA could be a good choice - some of the async support work would also have been good, had I made more progress in the latter half of this year. A couple of other ideas for big projects: * A secrets manager abstraction and built-in support for Vault, KMS, and other common ones * A

Re: Django 3.0 Release Notes - ASGI

2019-10-14 Thread Andrew Godwin
I agree - we need to communicate that ASGI support does *not *mean you can start writing async def views. I think we should put a big disclaimer to that effect next to it in the release notes and say it should be coming next release. Andrew On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 5:45 PM Josh Smeaton wrote: >

Re: Psycopg3 Redesign

2020-03-11 Thread Andrew Godwin
I am particularly excited for native async support arriving - that's something I'd love to have and ship support for from our side when it's done. The rest looks quite sensible too. Andrew On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:39 AM Jure Erznožnik wrote: > His proposed changes look awesome to me! > >

Re: Remove automatic date-naming of migrations (00XX_auto_YYYMMDD)

2020-04-22 Thread Andrew Godwin
I am a little mixed on this change - the behaviour during the initial development was indeed to concatenate names like this, albeit only for adding fields or models; I thought it looked unwieldy, which is why I added the "auto" name. That said, the number is the only part that actually matters,

Re: [FEATURE] Allow squashmigrations to squash the whole project

2020-04-22 Thread Andrew Godwin
I definitely think this is worth pursuing - the reason I didn't do it back in the day was that squashing the entire project involved solving some rather nasty dependency graph issues if there were any cycles of apps depending on models from other apps. If we can overcome that, though, and squash

Re: New Merger nomination.

2020-04-21 Thread Andrew Godwin
I also vote in favour of Claude becoming a Merger! Andrew On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 4:28:41 AM UTC-6, Markus Holtermann wrote: > > I vote in favor of Claude becoming a MERGER. > > Cheers, > > Markus > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020, at 10:31 PM, charettes wrote: > > I cast my vote in favor of

Re: async_unsafe's get_event_loop usage leads to "Too many open files" in tests

2020-10-13 Thread Andrew Godwin
Yeah, I'm not quite sure what this is, but I just ran get_event_loop() a thousand times and it gave me the same thing every time and didn't even budge the number of file descriptors. Can you replicate this behaviour in a brand new Django project? That's what I'd need to help debug it further.

Re: Async Caching

2020-09-27 Thread Andrew Godwin
te how possible it is to offer >>> > all of them and if everything can be made to work regardless of what mode >>> > (sync or async) it's in >>> >>> In terms of the package or the other built-in backends or just everything >>> in general like the ORM? If

Re: Async Caching

2020-09-26 Thread Andrew Godwin
Agreed - there's no work on caching inside Django yet, since the ORM is my next focus, but I would definitely suggest writing a new pluggable third-party backend that somehow provides async versions of the methods. The main work to do here is to work how quite how possible it is to offer all

Re: Redundant migration code

2020-09-19 Thread Andrew Godwin
I suspect the reason for this might be to undo circular references of ForeignKeys between apps - in this situation, you have to first have a migration that removes one FK, then in the other app remove the model, then in the first app remove the model. I can't quite remember though - but that

Re: Critical hints about Django migrations

2020-08-06 Thread Andrew Godwin
While I agree with some of the author's points, I think a critical piece of context is that Django migrations are designed for the 90% case - i.e., people who just want something to work on a small scale and don't need to worry about many aspects of the database yet. Like all parts of Django,

Re: What's wrong with the jenkins testrun failing on ASGI (I think?)

2020-06-16 Thread Andrew Godwin
Yup, I'm seeing if we can get asgiref fixed today, otherwise I'll revert the change that broke Django and issue 3.2.9. Andrew On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, at 2:48 AM, Florian Apolloner wrote: > Ok, so rebasing PRs to current master will fix this (leaving this here as > note for others who run into

Re: The blacklist / master issue

2020-06-16 Thread Andrew Godwin
I've definitely in favour of fixing all of the problematic word usage - after all, we eliminated master/slave from the database documentation years ago, we've just been a bit negligent at fixing the others. Agreed with Adam, though, about seeing what GitHub builds - they announced they're

Re: Welcome email

2020-11-08 Thread Andrew Godwin
to >>> import an mbox: >>> https://github.com/discourse/discourse/blob/master/script/import_scripts/mbox.rb >>> >>> I’m running the box importer script now and it appears to work fine. While >>> some people might have historical mbox files, it might be better

Re: Welcome email

2020-11-13 Thread Andrew Godwin
script to mash the APIs over HTTP) Andrew On Sun, Nov 8, 2020, at 2:36 PM, Andrew Godwin wrote: > I have been moving house this week (plus, yknow, the election) so I haven't > got anything done, but hope to poke at it early next week! > > Andrew > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2020, at 4:34

Re: Revisiting Python support for after Django 3.2 LTS

2020-11-19 Thread Andrew Godwin
I agree we should not be quite so beholden to our existing Python version policy - that was mostly to get us out of the early 3.x era. Now things are more stable, I'd support a policy that is much more like "any stable version of Python currently out there and supported". Andrew -- You

Re: Welcome email

2020-10-29 Thread Andrew Godwin
I'd be more than happy to assist a trial of moving things to the forum; we've had it running for over a year now, and I feel it's a much easier way to run a community. Among other things, we can: - Move posts to the right forum when they post in the wrong one (rather than emailing back and

Re: Do people actually squash migrations?

2021-05-11 Thread Andrew Godwin
Migration squashing was always meant to be something that was useful in a rapid development environment where you can't control all the installs (since it was a feature developed alongside a CMS run by many clients at the time). If you have control of all the places your project is installed

Re: deconstruct returns 3-tuple?

2021-09-18 Thread Andrew Godwin
As the note in that section explains, that is for custom *classes*, not for custom *fields*. Your observation is correct when applied to field deconstruction methods, but not for the system talked about there which lets you do it for arbitrary classes (as part of the values in field

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

2022-10-24 Thread Andrew Godwin
These are some great points, James - let me try to tackle them roughly in order. Proposing features - this is already in DEP 10, so I more just want to get that aspect of the Board actually going (and, as a side-effect, have something to aid fundraising). I am talking with the current Board

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

2022-10-24 Thread Andrew Godwin
belief in the need for visible, servant leaders in OSS communities rather than trying to embrace a flat hierarchy with mechanical checks and balances - but that is for another day. Andrew On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, at 4:26 PM, James Bennett wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 2:24 PM Andrew Godw

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

2022-10-25 Thread Andrew Godwin
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022, at 12:12 AM, James Bennett wrote: > > My first reaction to this is: if having a DEP that says the Technical Board > is supposed to take the lead in gathering feature proposals didn't get them > to do it, it doesn't feel like another DEP saying they're responsible for >

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

2022-10-26 Thread Andrew Godwin
I agree the Technical Board has not followed the letter of DEP 10, and I think the things you have highlighted are all valid failings, but I want to focus on - what should we do to remedy them? Given the lack of candidates we already have, if we ditch the current Board and try to elect a new

Re: Proposal for Django Core Sprints

2022-10-26 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi Paolo, I do like the overall idea - a few thoughts below. My first concern for this, which somewhat echoes James, is that trying to organise an additional in-person event that a large number of contributors are expected to go to is difficult. Funding considerations are one concern - we

Re: Changing the role of the Technical Board

2022-10-26 Thread Andrew Godwin
DEP shortly so it's more clear exactly what I want to change at a written-rules level - I suspect feedback on a more concrete proposal will help us talk about it more clearly. Andrew On Wed, Oct 26, 2022, at 4:55 PM, James Bennett wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 12:02 PM Andrew Godwin wr

Draft Steering Council DEP

2022-10-26 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi all, As a followup to my previous post about potential changes to the Technical Board - for which I thank you all for the feedback - I have taken the process to the next step and written a draft DEP: https://github.com/django/deps/pull/75/files (If you wish to see the DEP with styling, it

Re: Draft Steering Council DEP

2022-10-30 Thread Andrew Godwin
On Sun, Oct 30, 2022, at 10:42 PM, James Bennett wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 4:34 PM Andrew Godwin wrote: >> __ >> >> I have copied in the DSF Members mailing list as it is a governance-related >> DEP, but if we could keep all discussion on the thread in the Dj

Changing the role of the Technical Board

2022-10-21 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi everyone, I want to start a conversation about the Technical Board and its role in Django, and how I'd like to change it, including its name. Since its inception, the Technical Board has effectively only functioned as a backstop vote for large features that require DEPs, of which there have

Re: Draft Steering Council DEP

2022-11-01 Thread Andrew Godwin
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022, at 6:54 AM, C. Kirby wrote: > Having run the elections for the current technical board I agree with > Andrew's assessment that a more open requirement to run is a good idea. It > may create a bit more work on candidate verification for the DSF Board and > Fellows, but

Re: Technical Board vote on DEP 0012: The Steering Council

2022-11-30 Thread Andrew Godwin
Yes, I agree we can use the forum in future since it's less tied to Google. Provided the current +5 vote carries through to the end of the voting period, I will be suggesting that the Technical Board triggers the DEP 10 mechanism where we move this to the membership for a vote once the DSF

DEP 12 (Steering Council) Fully Adopted

2022-12-19 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi everyone, I am pleased to report that we've completed the extended approval process for DEP 12, which was needed since it was a governance change. Both the Technical Board and the DSF Board voted to not require a vote from the membership on the change, so it is now officially adopted and I

Re: Can we move the activity on this list to the Forum now?

2022-12-05 Thread Andrew Godwin
I did some investigation of moving django-users and django-developers to the Forum right after DjangoCon; I wanted to see if we could import all the old posts too, which we probably could, but I'm not entirely sure of the utility of that. I will say that the forum is a lot easier to moderate -

Re: Technical Board vote on DEP 0012: The Steering Council

2022-12-03 Thread Andrew Godwin
concluded and a result reached. Andrew On Wed, Nov 30, 2022, at 10:44 AM, Andrew Godwin wrote: > Yes, I agree we can use the forum in future since it's less tied to Google. > > Provided the current +5 vote carries through to the end of the voting period, > I will be suggesting that the Tec

Technical Board vote on DEP 0012: The Steering Council

2022-11-24 Thread Andrew Godwin
Hi all, As it seems discussion on DEP 12 has reached its end, and we received generally positive feedback, I am requesting a vote from the technical board on the following: "Shall we accept DEP 12 and send it to the DSF Board for further approval?" Note that as this is a governance change, it

Re: Can we move the activity on this list to the Forum now?

2023-01-19 Thread Andrew Godwin
hu, 19 Jan 2023 at 01:04, 'Kye Russell' via Django developers > (Contributions to Django itself) wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I find that the signal-to-noise ratio on this mailing list is (by my >> determination) quite bad around this time of year. >> >> Is a mo

Re: Proposal: Clarify individual members page

2022-11-08 Thread Andrew Godwin
Just want to pop in and say these are great ideas - feel free to copy me in on any PR if you want extra opinions! On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 8:26:28 AM UTC-7 Carlton Gibson wrote: > Great, Thanks Andrew. No urgency  > > On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 16:16, Andrew Mshar wrote: > >> Will do,

<    1   2   3   4   5