Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

We've fixed four small issues in the 1.8 branch since the release candidate (with no other reported blockers), so I am optimistic we’ll be able to release 1.8 final on Wednesday as scheduled. On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 4:45:21 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote: > > Good news: just one new release

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Good news: just one new release blocker this week (#24469) which is awaiting a final review from Aymeric. I'm targeting Wednesday of next week for the release candidate as well as a bug fix release for 1.7 (may be the last one, before 1.7 switches to security updates only). On Saturday, March

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

With about 10 days to go until the scheduled date for the release candidate (Monday, March 16), there's just one blocker that Anssi's working on (looks like tests aren't passing yet) [#24171]. About 7 issues have been fixed in 1.8 since the beta release. On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 at

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

\o/ On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Tim Graham wrote: > Zero blockers as of this writing. If we survive the next 12 hours with no > new ones, I'll release the beta around then (famous last words). > > > On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 7:29:09 PM UTC-5, Tim Graham wrote:

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Zero blockers as of this writing. If we survive the next 12 hours with no new ones, I'll release the beta around then (famous last words). On Monday, February 23, 2015 at 7:29:09 PM UTC-5, Tim Graham wrote: > > Previous two issues have been fixed, and now we have two new issues: > > #24391

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Previous two issues have been fixed, and now we have two new issues: #24391 UUIDField with default=uuid4 triggers validation on otherwise empty inline formsets #24395

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Patches for the two remaining blockers are awaiting review. #24381 Cache pickling exception in 1.8a1 with cross-table filter params #24377 UUIDField as

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

The three issues from last time are resolved, but there is a new issue I've been working on today. I have a tentative fix, but there is a failing test. Assuming nothing else comes up, I might consider releasing the beta tomorrow even if I can't solve that by then as it's not really a new issue,

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

>From my point of view #24351 is ready for a final sanity check and merging. -- Loïc > On Feb 19, 2015, at 10:10, Tim Graham wrote: > > 3 issues remain. I haven't confirmed with the owners, but it seems to me > there may be a good chance to wrap them up tomorrow. > >

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

3 issues remain. I haven't confirmed with the owners, but it seems to me there may be a good chance to wrap them up tomorrow. #24351 RunPython/RunSQL operations in contrib migrations and multi-db routers.

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Today's update: Rrelease tomorrow seems unlikely -- let's target Friday and if we finish earlier, that's a bonus. #24307 Oracle Syncdb breaks trying to set NULL to column that already is NULL Owner:

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

@Tim I believe it's quite easy actually, I've fixed my original patch and it's just waiting to be reviewed. It's available at https://github.com/django/django/pull/4071. However, it's a very rare bug and I only encountered it in the tests when working on another issue, not in any real project.

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

If it's the only release blocker left and the fix is difficult, I think we could issue a beta release without it. I think the worst case is that you'll get some duplicate bug reports from testers. On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 10:06:27 AM UTC-5, Markus Holtermann wrote: > > So, it turns out

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

So, it turns out that #24291 (Migrations fail with unused swappable model) only occurs when a swapped out model doesn't define an explicit model manager. Since auth.User is the only model that is officially supported for "swappiness" and it defines

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Here's the status on blockers. Given the work that remains, I don't foresee the beta release happening earlier than Wednesday, but the next update of this thread will be tomorrow. #24324 Crashes when project path or path to Django install contains

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

There are still quite a few unresolved issues, so the beta release won't happen today. I'll send an update at the end of the day with the status of the remaining issues. On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 1:30:44 PM UTC-5, Markus Holtermann wrote: > > Hey folks, > > I looked into the issues

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Hey folks, I looked into the issues #24225, #24264 and #24282 and have a working pull request ready for review: https://github.com/django/django/pull/4097 The essential change in the pull request is the way how the set of models that needs to be rerendered is constructed. Instead of naively

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Hey Tim, Thanks for the update. Could you check if #24282 is fixed by my PR as well and assign it to me in case it is. The error message looks familiar to the one I commented on the PR. Thanks. /Markus On February 13, 2015 2:33:38 AM GMT+01:00, Tim Graham wrote:

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Status of release blockers: #24320 Unable to serialize UUIDField when running dumpdata with JSON format Status: I wrote a failing test and will try to write a patch tomorrow if no one else takes a look

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Reminder that the 1.8 beta release is scheduled for twelve days from now: Monday, February 16. Please check this filter for remaining blockers for beta:

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

I think master is stabilizing and the number of unsolved regressions should be ~0 by tomorrow. I'd like to release the alpha around 2100 UTC tomorrow +/- ~4 hours depending on how things go with the remaining issues. Let me know if there is anything you think needs to be in the alpha that

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Congratulations! Looks like you've steadily moved it through. Tino On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Tim Graham wrote: > We did it -- all features are in or out for alpha. Please consider master > frozen for new features until we cut the stable/1.8.x branch later this >

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

We did it -- all features are in or out for alpha. Please consider master frozen for new features until we cut the stable/1.8.x branch later this week. Feel free to commit code cleanups and/or bug fixes until then. On Friday, January 9, 2015 at 1:14:02 PM UTC-5, Tim Graham wrote: > > Here is

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Here is the fifth update with several days to go until alpha. I believe we are on track for a feature freeze at the end of day on Monday. Let's see how things go, but I'd like to cut the stable/1.8.x branch and issue the alpha release by the following Friday (a week from today). New blockers:

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Thank you, Tim, for shepherding this. On Jan 3, 2015 8:09 AM, "Tim Graham" wrote: > Here is the fourth update with a week to go until alpha. At this time, I > am thinking we'll have the feature freeze on Monday, January 12 as planned, > but perhaps issue the actual alpha

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Here is the fourth update with a week to go until alpha. At this time, I am thinking we'll have the feature freeze on Monday, January 12 as planned, but perhaps issue the actual alpha release a couple days later just to give some time for some extra polish in case any large patches are

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Here is the third update with a week and a half to go until alpha (I incorrectly said in the last update a couple days ago that we have 3 weeks left!): #23861 - Fields referenced in migrations cannot be (re)moved, even if migrations have been

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

On Monday, December 29, 2014 10:40:06 AM UTC+1, Claude Paroz wrote: > > On Saturday, December 27, 2014 4:46:52 PM UTC+1, Tim Graham wrote: >> >> #23745 - Migrations migrate is slow >> (new) >> Owner: Claude >> Status: Patch seems to need improvement

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

On Saturday, December 27, 2014 4:46:52 PM UTC+1, Tim Graham wrote: > > #23745 - Migrations migrate is slow > (new) > Owner: Claude > Status: Patch seems to need improvement so it doesn't cause a regression > with swappable models. > Sorry, but I'm

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Here is the second update with three weeks to go until alpha: #23861 - Fields referenced in migrations cannot be (re)moved, even if migrations have been squashed #23891

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Hey Tim, thanks for the collection of tasks that have to be done for 1.8. Especially wrt #23861 and #23891 I just realized that, since 1.8 is an LTS release, we'd need to support and that field (and related changes) until 2018. That's Django 2.2/2.3 I guess. Considering the ideas that exists

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Riccardo Magliocchetti < riccardo.magliocche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > Il 20/12/2014 20:40, Tim Graham ha scritto: > >> You can also see other tickets we are targeting for 1.8 with this >> filter. This includes some of the remaining large features as well

Re: status of 1.8 release blockers

Hello, Il 20/12/2014 20:40, Tim Graham ha scritto: You can also see other tickets we are targeting for 1.8 with this filter. This includes some of the remaining large features as well as a couple code reorganizations we want to make closer to when cut the 1.8 branch to avoid creating conflicts

status of 1.8 release blockers

As we approach the date for 1.8 alpha, I plan to send a weekly update on the status of release blocking issues. We currently have 3 release blockers affecting master. You can use this Trac filter to see them: https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned=new=master=Release+blocker You