Update test matrix: Add Django 2.0, drop 1.8 by carltongibson · Pull Request #5457 · encode/django-rest-framework (original) (raw)

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Conversation7 Commits2 Checks0 Files changed

Conversation

This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters

[ Show hidden characters]({{ revealButtonHref }})

carltongibson

@auvipy @carltongibson

@carltongibson

xordoquy

@tomchristie

Unless there's a clear benefit I see no need to drop 1.9 for this release.
Granted it's EOL, but there's different concerns w/ Django's policy vs ours.
In contrast - we do have cause to drop 1.8 for this release since it makes one of our issues easier to close off.

@tomchristie

In short: it doesn't cost us anything to continue to support 1.9 for now, but it does cost us to continue to support 1.8. That's our guiding line here.

@xordoquy

provided that we'll drop it whenever it'll become a pain point what's the point of keeping it ?

@tomchristie

what's the point of keeping it ?

I'm not that fussed either way, but...

In order to better support teams who started their project in the first half of 2016, who'd like to stay up to date with the latest version of REST framework, and don't have any pressing reasons to upgrade from Django 1.9. (Despite the formal EOL)

@tomchristie

@carltongibson

OK, cool.

Just for anyone reading this, my views are:

  1. Formal EOL is a pressing reason to upgrade. This is simply from the security aspect. It's really not OK to be using EOL software.
  2. The non-LTS versions are explicitly for people who are in a position to keep up. Others should use LTS.

For both these reasons I'm for keeping the matrix rolling forwards — otherwise we send the wrong message to users.

But also, it does make our job easier: #5458

carltongibson added a commit that referenced this pull request

Sep 27, 2017

@carltongibson

Remove Django 1.8 & 1.9 from README and setup.py

carltongibson added a commit that referenced this pull request

Sep 27, 2017

@carltongibson

Remove Django 1.8 & 1.9 from README and setup.py

@rpkilby

One minor reason to drop 1.9 is that it reduces the total build time/saves trees.

carltongibson added a commit that referenced this pull request

Sep 28, 2017

@carltongibson

Remove Django 1.8 & 1.9 from README and setup.py

carltongibson added a commit that referenced this pull request

Oct 5, 2017

@carltongibson

Remove Django 1.8 & 1.9 from README and setup.py

carltongibson added a commit that referenced this pull request

Oct 5, 2017

@carltongibson

Remove Django 1.8 & 1.9 from README and setup.py

carltongibson pushed a commit that referenced this pull request

Oct 6, 2017

Moved issue links to top for easier access. (Can move back later)

Strict JSON handling

Remove Django 1.8 & 1.9 from README and setup.py

Tickets migrated to 3.7.0 milestone.

Move issue links back to bottom.