Re: Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

Just want to share my emotional support for your astonishing job. God bless you. On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 6:40:01 PM UTC+2, Andrew Godwin wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I'm going to withdraw the Channels patch for consideration for 1.10; > there's a lot more concern and uncertainty around it

Re: Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Carl Meyer wrote: > On 05/10/2016 10:39 AM, Andrew Godwin wrote: > > - Being almost purely an addition to Django, even though it technically > > inserts a new layer, makes it more well-suited to live externally than > > many other features.

Re: Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

Seems sensible. In particular having the documentation available as part of the regular Django docs would mean there's very little difference to the end user, but without us having to get everything merged into the core codebase. Is the docs element something we can reach a consensus on, or are

Re: Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

On 05/10/2016 10:39 AM, Andrew Godwin wrote: > - Being almost purely an addition to Django, even though it technically > inserts a new layer, makes it more well-suited to live externally than > many other features. While the external package will have to > monkey-patch a few things, it'll be

Re: Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

Yes thank you Andrew for your continued work to move this conversation forward. I hope that Channels can continue to grow as an external package under the Django umbrella and bring on more contributors and improvements. Best, Mark On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 12:44:21 PM UTC-4, Ryan Hiebert

Re: Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

Thank you, Andrew, for your hard work. Channels is an exciting new feature, and I'm glad that you're bringing it together. You're doing an excellent job. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To

Withdrawing Channels from 1.10

Hi everyone, I'm going to withdraw the Channels patch for consideration for 1.10; there's a lot more concern and uncertainty around it than I had anticipated, given the reaction up until this point, and it's clear I have some more work to do at convincing the community and proving the design.