Add Python 3.7 support for Django 1.11?

265 views
Skip to first unread message

Tim Graham

unread,
Nov 16, 2018, 10:24:33 AM11/16/18
to Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)
We've received a relatively steady stream of requests to add Python 3.7 support for Django 1.11. Is there support or opposition for that?

See comments of https://github.com/django/django/commit/931c60c5216bd71bc11f489e00e063331cf21f40#commitcomment-31328709 for the stream of "please backport this to 1.11" comments.

Tom Forbes

unread,
Nov 16, 2018, 10:32:29 AM11/16/18
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
Do we have an idea of how many fixes would need to be backported? If it's just this one (or a very select few) I would support that. You can work around most things in Python but a hard syntax error is a big pain, so I can understand people wanting this.

On 16 November 2018 at 15:24:44, Tim Graham (timog...@gmail.com) wrote:

We've received a relatively steady stream of requests to add Python 3.7 support for Django 1.11. Is there support or opposition for that?

See comments of https://github.com/django/django/commit/931c60c5216bd71bc11f489e00e063331cf21f40#commitcomment-31328709 for the stream of "please backport this to 1.11" comments.
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/26621bcf-58eb-4c5f-a87b-250f0c2174a8%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Ramiro Morales

unread,
Nov 16, 2018, 10:37:30 AM11/16/18
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 12:32 PM Tom Forbes <t...@tomforb.es> wrote:
Do we have an idea of how many fixes would need to be backported?


For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
Ramiro Morales
@ramiromorales

Adam Johnson

unread,
Nov 17, 2018, 7:15:58 AM11/17/18
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
Since it's about 3 lines in django itself, I think it's a good idea to backport and save users the pain.

--
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.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
Adam

Markus Holtermann

unread,
Nov 17, 2018, 12:11:17 PM11/17/18
to django-d...@googlegroups.com
Agreed, let's add official 3.7 support.

/Markus

On Sat, Nov 17, 2018, at 1:15 PM, Adam Johnson wrote:
> Since it's about 3 lines in django itself, I think it's a good idea to
> backport and save users the pain.
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 at 15:37, Ramiro Morales <cra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 12:32 PM Tom Forbes <t...@tomforb.es> wrote:
> >
> >> Do we have an idea of how many fixes would need to be backported?
> >>
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/django/django/compare/stable/1.11.x...moneymeets:moneymeets/1.11.16-py37
> >
> >
> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFNZOJNqLQtq03ee-Sfc5v5z1YzETbxu%3D-bWN9FQk0%3D5Yd1Whg%40mail.gmail.com
> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFNZOJNqLQtq03ee-Sfc5v5z1YzETbxu%3D-bWN9FQk0%3D5Yd1Whg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ramiro Morales
> > @ramiromorales
> >
> > --
> > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAO7PdF_VpdxxCPkLSh3GHCA6svsoCKa7zb0WiLnxuZFSPQe4%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com
> > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAO7PdF_VpdxxCPkLSh3GHCA6svsoCKa7zb0WiLnxuZFSPQe4%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> > .
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >
>
>
> --
> Adam
>
> --
> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMyDDM1VANrdq0M70N4%3DPX1b2zzuCguz83u82DM6s%3DJS1FXWfQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Tim Graham

unread,
Nov 17, 2018, 6:08:43 PM11/17/18
to Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)

Josh Smeaton

unread,
Nov 17, 2018, 11:21:14 PM11/17/18
to Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)
Good merge!

Should this also be a policy change, or is it better to maintain a position of "if it's relatively easy and unobtrusive"?

Florian Apolloner

unread,
Nov 18, 2018, 4:37:44 PM11/18/18
to Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)


On Sunday, November 18, 2018 at 5:21:14 AM UTC+1, Josh Smeaton wrote:
Should this also be a policy change, or is it better to maintain a position of "if it's relatively easy and unobtrusive"?

Imo absolutely the latter. Personally I am (sadly to late) not really happy with official support at all. I would have merged the patch without documentation changes -- the docs now imply that we will fix it in the future too…
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages