Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

We're on schedule for 1.9 final tomorrow. There are 3 release blockers in 
Trac, however, 1 blocker affects only master and the other two also affect 
1.8 and thus aren't blockers for 1.9.

On Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 3:17:27 PM UTC-5, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Sorry for the lack of updates, but no news is good news. We're on track 
> for a release candidate on Monday.
>
> On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 7:41:55 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> We're on schedule for Monday's beta release. Most of the backported fixes 
>> have been issues affecting 1.8 too.
>>
>> On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 10:31:13 AM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> We've resolved a couple of release blockers on the stable/1.9.x branch 
>>> since the alpha, but overall bug reports have been quiet. Hopefully that's 
>>> a good sign!
>>>
>>> The beta release is scheduled for 2 weeks + 2 days from now, Monday 
>>> October 19.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 3:17:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 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 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 23, 2015 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-4, Markus 
> Holtermann wrote:
>>
>> 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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still 
>>> under review. 
>>>
>>> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I 
>>> am not sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely 
>>> missed the base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship 
>>> it with the feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users 
>>> to 
>>> try it out. Though, that would probably be a first."
>>>
>>> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The 
>>> main problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the 
>>> feature very well and describe how one should go about setting the 
>>> values 
>>> of the new settings.
>>>
>>> Options:
>>> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
>>> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if 
>>> the patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the 
>>> meantime) 
>>> and release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
>>> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to 
>>> proceed on master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the 
>>> option to backport the patch if it's completed.
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>>
>>> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more 
 patches I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.

 #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
 Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements 
 (docs could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, 
 as 
 you've been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your 
 thoughts.

 #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
 Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in 
 the morning.

 On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn 
 wrote:
>
> Sorry everyone :(
>
> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  
> wrote:
>
>> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the 
>> feature freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on 
>> Tuesday.
>>
>> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't 
>> completed the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>>>
>>

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

Sorry for the lack of updates, but no news is good news. We're on track for 
a release candidate on Monday.

On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 7:41:55 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> We're on schedule for Monday's beta release. Most of the backported fixes 
> have been issues affecting 1.8 too.
>
> On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 10:31:13 AM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> We've resolved a couple of release blockers on the stable/1.9.x branch 
>> since the alpha, but overall bug reports have been quiet. Hopefully that's 
>> a good sign!
>>
>> The beta release is scheduled for 2 weeks + 2 days from now, Monday 
>> October 19.
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 3:17:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> 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 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 23, 2015 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-4, Markus Holtermann 
 wrote:
>
> 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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham 
> wrote:
>>
>> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
>> review. 
>>
>> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am 
>> not sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely 
>> missed 
>> the base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with 
>> the feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it 
>> out. Though, that would probably be a first."
>>
>> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
>> problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
>> very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
>> new settings.
>>
>> Options:
>> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
>> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if 
>> the patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the 
>> meantime) 
>> and release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
>> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed 
>> on master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option 
>> to 
>> backport the patch if it's completed.
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more 
>>> patches I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.
>>>
>>> #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
>>> Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements 
>>> (docs could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as 
>>> you've been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your 
>>> thoughts.
>>>
>>> #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
>>> Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in 
>>> the morning.
>>>
>>> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn 
>>> wrote:

 Sorry everyone :(

 On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  
 wrote:

> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the 
> feature freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on 
> Tuesday.
>
> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't 
> completed the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>
>
> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham 
> wrote:
>>
>> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>>
>> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major 
>> features from the last mail.
>>
>> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress 
>> on getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on 
>> track for 
>> finishing up by alpha.
>>
>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

We're on schedule for Monday's beta release. Most of the backported fixes 
have been issues affecting 1.8 too.

On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 10:31:13 AM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> We've resolved a couple of release blockers on the stable/1.9.x branch 
> since the alpha, but overall bug reports have been quiet. Hopefully that's 
> a good sign!
>
> The beta release is scheduled for 2 weeks + 2 days from now, Monday 
> October 19.
>
> On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 3:17:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> 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 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 23, 2015 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-4, Markus Holtermann 
>>> wrote:

 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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
> review. 
>
> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am 
> not sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely 
> missed 
> the base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with 
> the feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it 
> out. Though, that would probably be a first."
>
> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
> problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
> very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
> new settings.
>
> Options:
> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the 
> patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and 
> release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed 
> on master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to 
> backport the patch if it's completed.
>
> Opinions?
>
> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more 
>> patches I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.
>>
>> #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
>> Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements 
>> (docs could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as 
>> you've been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your 
>> thoughts.
>>
>> #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
>> Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in 
>> the morning.
>>
>> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry everyone :(
>>>
>>> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  
>>> wrote:
>>>
 The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the 
 feature freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on 
 Tuesday.

 There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't 
 completed the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.


 On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham 
 wrote:
>
> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>
> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major 
> features from the last mail.
>
> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress 
> on getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track 
> for 
> finishing up by alpha.
>
> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, 
>> September 21).
>>
>> Planned major features for 1.9:
>>
>> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>>
>> I haven't seen any recent activity on t

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

We've resolved a couple of release blockers on the stable/1.9.x branch 
since the alpha, but overall bug reports have been quiet. Hopefully that's 
a good sign!

The beta release is scheduled for 2 weeks + 2 days from now, Monday October 
19.

On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 at 3:17:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> 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 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 23, 2015 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-4, Markus Holtermann 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote:

 The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
 review. 

 Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am 
 not sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely missed 
 the base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with the 
 feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it out. 
 Though, that would probably be a first."

 I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
 problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
 very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
 new settings.

 Options:
 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the 
 patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and 
 release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed 
 on master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to 
 backport the patch if it's completed.

 Opinions?

 On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more 
> patches I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.
>
> #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
> Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements 
> (docs could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as 
> you've been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your 
> thoughts.
>
> #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
> Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in 
> the morning.
>
> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>>
>> Sorry everyone :(
>>
>> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  wrote:
>>
>>> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the 
>>> feature freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.
>>>
>>> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't 
>>> completed the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham 
>>> wrote:

 With 1 week to go until alpha:

 I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features 
 from the last mail.

 Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
 getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
 finishing up by alpha.

 On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, 
> September 21).
>
> Planned major features for 1.9:
>
> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>
> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I 
> heard anything from Marc about it.
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>
> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>
> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 
> 1.9.
>
> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

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 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 23, 2015 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-4, Markus Holtermann 
> wrote:
>>
>> 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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
>>> review. 
>>>
>>> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am 
>>> not sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely missed 
>>> the base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with the 
>>> feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it out. 
>>> Though, that would probably be a first."
>>>
>>> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
>>> problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
>>> very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
>>> new settings.
>>>
>>> Options:
>>> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
>>> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the 
>>> patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and 
>>> release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
>>> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed on 
>>> master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to 
>>> backport the patch if it's completed.
>>>
>>> Opinions?
>>>
>>> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more 
 patches I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.

 #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
 Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements 
 (docs could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as 
 you've been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your 
 thoughts.

 #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
 Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in the 
 morning.

 On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>
> Sorry everyone :(
>
> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  wrote:
>
>> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature 
>> freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.
>>
>> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't 
>> completed the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>>>
>>> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features 
>>> from the last mail.
>>>
>>> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
>>> getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
>>> finishing up by alpha.
>>>
>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, 
 September 21).

 Planned major features for 1.9:

 PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)

 I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I 
 heard anything from Marc about it.
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726

 Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)

 I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 
 1.9.

 https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6

 Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
 I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work 
 left to is to write documentation.
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848

 Release blockers:

 - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
 Owner: Jani Tiainen
 Status: I

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

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 23, 2015 at 6:39:58 AM UTC-4, Markus Holtermann 
wrote:
>
> 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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
>> review. 
>>
>> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am not 
>> sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely missed the 
>> base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with the 
>> feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it out. 
>> Though, that would probably be a first."
>>
>> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
>> problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
>> very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
>> new settings.
>>
>> Options:
>> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
>> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the 
>> patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and 
>> release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
>> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed on 
>> master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to 
>> backport the patch if it's completed.
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more patches 
>>> I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.
>>>
>>> #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
>>> Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements 
>>> (docs could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as 
>>> you've been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your 
>>> thoughts.
>>>
>>> #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
>>> Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in the 
>>> morning.
>>>
>>> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:

 Sorry everyone :(

 On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  wrote:

> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature 
> freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.
>
> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't completed 
> the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>
>
> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>>
>> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features 
>> from the last mail.
>>
>> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
>> getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
>> finishing up by alpha.
>>
>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, 
>>> September 21).
>>>
>>> Planned major features for 1.9:
>>>
>>> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>>>
>>> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I 
>>> heard anything from Marc about it.
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>>>
>>> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>>>
>>> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>>>
>>> Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
>>> I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work 
>>> left to is to write documentation.
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848
>>>
>>> Release blockers:
>>>
>>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>>> Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani 
>>> is making good progress)
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!

 Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Markus Holtermann]

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, September 23, 2015 at 2:54:50 AM UTC+10, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
> review. 
>
> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am not 
> sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely missed the 
> base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with the 
> feature inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it out. 
> Though, that would probably be a first."
>
> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
> problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
> very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
> new settings.
>
> Options:
> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the 
> patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and 
> release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed on 
> master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to 
> backport the patch if it's completed.
>
> Opinions?
>
> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more patches 
>> I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.
>>
>> #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
>> Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements (docs 
>> could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as you've 
>> been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your thoughts.
>>
>> #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
>> Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in the 
>> morning.
>>
>> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry everyone :(
>>>
>>> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  wrote:
>>>
 The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature 
 freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.

 There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't completed 
 the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.


 On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>
> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features 
> from the last mail.
>
> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
> getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
> finishing up by alpha.
>
> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, 
>> September 21).
>>
>> Planned major features for 1.9:
>>
>> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>>
>> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I 
>> heard anything from Marc about it.
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>>
>> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>>
>> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.
>>
>> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>>
>> Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
>> I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left 
>> to is to write documentation.
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848
>>
>> Release blockers:
>>
>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>> Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani 
>> is making good progress)
>>
>> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!
>>>
>>> Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).
>>>
>>> Release blockers:
>>>
>>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>>> Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an 
>>> improvement from last week)
>>>
>>>
>>> Other tickets tagged for 1.9:
>>>
>>> - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tom Christie]

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 group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/39828781-b20f-46b7-a49d-7a18554a1b46%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tom Christie]

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 thoroughly reviewed before 
commit.

As one example it's not clear what the preferred resolution of this point 
 should be. 
Should the `DATA_UPLOAD_MAX_MEMORY_SIZE` guard include accessing 
`request.body` directly or not? (Related to Tim's point re. documentation.)

As I say, its good work, and I'd like to see it reach completion, but its 
not the sort of change we should be rushing.

(I wouldn't oppose a contrary judgement on it tho)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/54acf290-b08c-487b-ad2d-962bd26e8cb9%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Florian Apolloner]

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 the 
> overall schedule, so whichever is easier for Tim to manage works for 
> me. If it's "oh no, we missed this major use case", then option 1 is 
> probably where we are.
>

My time this week is basically zero, someone else would have to make the 
decission (I will probably without internet starting on friday). Whatever 
works for Tim should be fine for me though.

Cheers,
Florian 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/d81dae30-cb19-4d57-aad5-ae21d761c237%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Russell Keith-Magee]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Tim Graham  wrote:
> The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under
> review.
>
> Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am not
> sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely missed the
> base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with the feature
> inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it out. Though,
> that would probably be a first."
>
> I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main
> problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature very
> well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the new
> settings.
>
> Options:
> 1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
> 2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the patch
> is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and release
> the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
> 3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed on
> master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to
> backport the patch if it's completed.
>
> Opinions?

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 the
overall schedule, so whichever is easier for Tim to manage works for
me. If it's "oh no, we missed this major use case", then option 1 is
probably where we are.

Russ %-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAJxq849s8jaiGFsXDnwwRtdb-t4SRoWHMyVwrAsVkgKCpv3a_w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

The second patch has been committed, and the first one is still under 
review. 

Florian says "with all that forth and back [on the pull request] I am not 
sure if it is not better to defer it to 1.10, i.e. I completely missed the 
base64 stuff for instance. One option would be to ship it with the feature 
inactive and mark it as experimental and ask users to try it out. Though, 
that would probably be a first."

I'd also be more comfortable if it were disabled by default. The main 
problem for me is the documentation doesn't really motivate the feature 
very well and describe how one should go about setting the values of the 
new settings.

Options:
1) Defer the patch to 1.10 and release the alpha today.
2) Maintain the feature freeze until the end of the week to see if the 
patch is better resolved by then (fix bugs on master in the meantime) and 
release the alpha then (whether or not the patch is completed).
3) Create the 1.9 branch today to allow normal development to proceed on 
master and release the alpha by the end of the week with the option to 
backport the patch if it's completed.

Opinions?

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 9:08:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more patches 
> I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.
>
> #21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
> Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements (docs 
> could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as you've 
> been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your thoughts.
>
> #24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
> Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in the 
> morning.
>
> On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>>
>> Sorry everyone :(
>>
>> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  wrote:
>>
>>> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature 
>>> freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.
>>>
>>> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't completed 
>>> the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 With 1 week to go until alpha:

 I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features 
 from the last mail.

 Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
 getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
 finishing up by alpha.

 On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, September 
> 21).
>
> Planned major features for 1.9:
>
> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>
> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I 
> heard anything from Marc about it.
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>
> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>
> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.
>
> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>
> Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
> I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left 
> to is to write documentation.
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848
>
> Release blockers:
>
> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
> Owner: Jani Tiainen
> Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani 
> is making good progress)
>
> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!
>>
>> Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).
>>
>> Release blockers:
>>
>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>> Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an 
>> improvement from last week)
>>
>>
>> Other tickets tagged for 1.9:
>>
>> - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
>> Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread 
>> for a decision on what to do
>> Mailing list thread: 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
>> Owner: pending discussion
>>
>> - Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
>> Owner: elky
>> Status: In progress
>>
>> - Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
>> https://c

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

Let's consider master feature frozen for now. There are two more patches 
I'd like to merge before we cut the 1.9 branch.

#21231 -- Enforced a max size for POST values read into memory
https://github.com/django/django/pull/3852
Status: Needs final code reviews and probably some doc enhancements (docs 
could possibly be deferred until after alpha). Florian & Shai, as you've 
been taking the lead on reviewing this, please let us know your thoughts.

#24509 -- Added Expression support to SQLInsertCompiler
https://github.com/django/django/pull/5324 
Status: Josh working on some doc enhancements now, I will review in the 
morning.

On Friday, September 18, 2015 at 10:03:45 AM UTC-4, Marc Tamlyn wrote:
>
> Sorry everyone :(
>
> On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  > wrote:
>
>> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature 
>> freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.
>>
>> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't completed 
>> the Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>>>
>>> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features from 
>>> the last mail.
>>>
>>> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
>>> getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
>>> finishing up by alpha.
>>>
>>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, September 
 21).

 Planned major features for 1.9:

 PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)

 I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I 
 heard anything from Marc about it.
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726

 Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)

 I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.

 https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6

 Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
 I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left 
 to is to write documentation.
 https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848

 Release blockers:

 - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
 Owner: Jani Tiainen
 Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani is 
 making good progress)

 On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!
>
> Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).
>
> Release blockers:
>
> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
> Owner: Jani Tiainen
> Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an 
> improvement from last week)
>
>
> Other tickets tagged for 1.9:
>
> - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
> Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread 
> for a decision on what to do
> Mailing list thread: 
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
> Owner: pending discussion
>
> - Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
> Owner: elky
> Status: In progress
>
> - Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25200
> Status: to be done after previous item is completed
>
>
> Relevant ticket filters:
>
> Release blockers affecting master:
>
> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&version=master&severity=Release+blocker
>
> Tickets tagged 1.9:
>
> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&keywords=~1.9
>
 -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/261819cf-fb09-4e6b-b162-d2cdc76f3807%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Marc Tamlyn]

Sorry everyone :(

On 18 September 2015 at 15:01, Tim Graham  wrote:

> The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature
> freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.
>
> There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't completed the
> Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.
>
>
> On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>>
>> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features from
>> the last mail.
>>
>> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on
>> getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for
>> finishing up by alpha.
>>
>> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, September
>>> 21).
>>>
>>> Planned major features for 1.9:
>>>
>>> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>>>
>>> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I heard
>>> anything from Marc about it.
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>>>
>>> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>>>
>>> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>>>
>>> Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
>>> I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left to
>>> is to write documentation.
>>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848
>>>
>>> Release blockers:
>>>
>>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>>> Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani is
>>> making good progress)
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:

 Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!

 Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).

 Release blockers:

 - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
 Owner: Jani Tiainen
 Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an
 improvement from last week)


 Other tickets tagged for 1.9:

 - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
 Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread
 for a decision on what to do
 Mailing list thread:
 https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
 Owner: pending discussion

 - Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
 Owner: elky
 Status: In progress

 - Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
 https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25200
 Status: to be done after previous item is completed


 Relevant ticket filters:

 Release blockers affecting master:

 https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&version=master&severity=Release+blocker

 Tickets tagged 1.9:

 https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&keywords=~1.9

>>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/261819cf-fb09-4e6b-b162-d2cdc76f3807%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMwjO1ERfizgh%3DaC4Y7D5gYNwEZ4sGR_umbXpOjs6One5xN-xg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

The major features are officially deferred. Let's try for the feature 
freeze by end of day on Monday and the alpha release on Tuesday.

There aren't any critical blockers at this time. Jani hasn't completed the 
Oracle GIS work, but this isn't a must-have for alpha.

On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 7:50:31 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> With 1 week to go until alpha:
>
> I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features from 
> the last mail.
>
> Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on 
> getting the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for 
> finishing up by alpha.
>
> On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, September 
>> 21).
>>
>> Planned major features for 1.9:
>>
>> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>>
>> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I heard 
>> anything from Marc about it.
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>>
>> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>>
>> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.
>>
>> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>>
>> Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
>> I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left to 
>> is to write documentation.
>> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848
>>
>> Release blockers:
>>
>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>> Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani is 
>> making good progress)
>>
>> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>>
>>> Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!
>>>
>>> Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).
>>>
>>> Release blockers:
>>>
>>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>>> Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an 
>>> improvement from last week)
>>>
>>>
>>> Other tickets tagged for 1.9:
>>>
>>> - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
>>> Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread 
>>> for a decision on what to do
>>> Mailing list thread: 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
>>> Owner: pending discussion
>>>
>>> - Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
>>> Owner: elky
>>> Status: In progress
>>>
>>> - Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25200
>>> Status: to be done after previous item is completed
>>>
>>>
>>> Relevant ticket filters:
>>>
>>> Release blockers affecting master:
>>>
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&version=master&severity=Release+blocker
>>>
>>> Tickets tagged 1.9:
>>>
>>> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&keywords=~1.9
>>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/261819cf-fb09-4e6b-b162-d2cdc76f3807%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

With 1 week to go until alpha:

I haven't heard anything from Marc or Preston on the major features from 
the last mail.

Jani continues to give updates in #django-dev about his progress on getting 
the Oracle GIS backend working. Things seem to be on track for finishing up 
by alpha.

On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:55:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, September 21).
>
> Planned major features for 1.9:
>
> PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)
>
> I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I heard 
> anything from Marc about it.
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726
>
> Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)
>
> I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.
>
> https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6
>
> Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
> I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left to 
> is to write documentation.
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848
>
> Release blockers:
>
> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
> Owner: Jani Tiainen
> Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani is 
> making good progress)
>
> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>>
>> Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!
>>
>> Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).
>>
>> Release blockers:
>>
>> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
>> Owner: Jani Tiainen
>> Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an 
>> improvement from last week)
>>
>>
>> Other tickets tagged for 1.9:
>>
>> - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
>> Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread for 
>> a decision on what to do
>> Mailing list thread: 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
>> Owner: pending discussion
>>
>> - Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
>> Owner: elky
>> Status: In progress
>>
>> - Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25200
>> Status: to be done after previous item is completed
>>
>>
>> Relevant ticket filters:
>>
>> Release blockers affecting master:
>>
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&version=master&severity=Release+blocker
>>
>> Tickets tagged 1.9:
>>
>> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&keywords=~1.9
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/f702794b-2886-415d-988c-71c267765efa%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

Status with 2 weeks and a weekend to go until alpha (Monday, September 21).

Planned major features for 1.9:

PostgreSQL Full Text Search (Marc Tamlyn)

I haven't seen any recent activity on the pull request, nor have I heard 
anything from Marc about it.
https://github.com/django/django/pull/4726

Custom indexes (Marc Tamlyn)

I haven't see any work on revising the DEP, so this seem out for 1.9.

https://github.com/django/deps/pull/6

Template-based widget rendering (Preston Timmons)
I think the code is in fairly good shape. It seems the main work left to is 
to write documentation.
https://github.com/django/django/pull/4848

Release blockers:

- Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
Owner: Jani Tiainen
Status: In progress (from recent IRC discussion, it sounds like Jani is 
making good progress)

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 3:40:22 PM UTC-4, Tim Graham wrote:
>
> Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!
>
> Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).
>
> Release blockers:
>
> - Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
> Owner: Jani Tiainen
> Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an 
> improvement from last week)
>
>
> Other tickets tagged for 1.9:
>
> - No way to create tables for apps without migrations
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
> Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread for 
> a decision on what to do
> Mailing list thread: 
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
> Owner: pending discussion
>
> - Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
> Owner: elky
> Status: In progress
>
> - Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
> https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25200
> Status: to be done after previous item is completed
>
>
> Relevant ticket filters:
>
> Release blockers affecting master:
>
> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&version=master&severity=Release+blocker
>
> Tickets tagged 1.9:
>
> https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&keywords=~1.9
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/fb2252d7-5bc0-4807-9c69-a9545163b031%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

status of 1.9 release blockers

[Tim Graham]

Time to kickoff the progress tracker for the next major release!

Here's the status with 4 weeks to go until alpha (September 21).

Release blockers:

- Add Oracle support for new-style GIS functions
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24688
Owner: Jani Tiainen
Status: In progress (test suite runs on Oracle now, which is an improvement 
from last week)


Other tickets tagged for 1.9:

- No way to create tables for apps without migrations
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25144
Status: Awaiting replies to "Keeping apps without migrations?" thread for a 
decision on what to do
Mailing list thread: 
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/qHP4ZQSK9xM/discussion
Owner: pending discussion

- Replace admin icons images by inline SVG
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/20597
Owner: elky
Status: In progress

- Update tutorial screenshots for new admin theme
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/25200
Status: to be done after previous item is completed


Relevant ticket filters:

Release blockers affecting master:
https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&version=master&severity=Release+blocker

Tickets tagged 1.9:
https://code.djangoproject.com/query?status=assigned&status=new&keywords=~1.9

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/15078a94-d67e-4105-a739-d02c8a42ebfc%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.