Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Django 1.9 Released

djangoproject.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 91 posts

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#81

Post by Scarblac »

pbreit wrote: post #68
jsmeaton wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except for HN, Twitter & Reddit, are there any services that don't use email for login? I guess sites that use the username as a form of identity within a site. Email address usernames are just identifiers and contact information, without really being linked to an identity. I would think if auth was being written from scratch it'd probably default to email based usernames. That ship has sailed though.

But it shouldn't have sailed. Frameworks need to keep up with the times. That should be a benefit of frameworks. Should be possible while preserving backwards compatibility.

Note that database migrations weren't part of Django until 1.7, before that they were provided by an external app (South).

Which meant that Django's database models couldn't migrate.

Even now, there is no real way to start with Django's own User model and switch your project over to a custom one later (because you'd have many database tables with foreign keys to the Django one). The current recommendation is to start new projects with a custom User model always.

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#82

Post by ubernostrum »

trymas wrote: post #77
jsmeaton wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Django Software Foundation has just hired a part time person to organise fundraising [0]. There is also discussion happening around the community about trying to find a sustainable way of funding open source projects and Django in particular. Part of the problem is that it's hard to get companies to "donate" money. If they can purchase something like "support" or something else tangible, or "sponsorship" out of t…

Maybe I do not know some important details, but why DSF (Django Software Foundation), does not do Django consulting in the first place. They very highly likely can do the best Django consulting in the world. Secondly, maybe DSF could bake some great products for/from Django? The first ideas I have is Django specific, and user friendly: - PaaS; - analytics (as in 'new relic'); - crash and performance logging (as in 's…

It's important to remember that the DSF is a non-profit foundation registered under US laws, which restrict what it can do. Many types of "just act like a business and sell things" ideas are automatically illegal for a non-profit foundation.

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#83

Post by ubernostrum »

jsmeaton wrote: post #62
Alex3917 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I actually hadn't seen that, but I know there are also longstanding tickets for this. I actually don't like the solutions in those threads, I think better to just add an extra field to the models, so have something like 'db_email' and 'display_email'. I realize you can do this with a functional index or whatever, but I think that's actually kind of hacky given the lack of ORM support for functional indexes. My…

FWIW I agree the solutions in that thread aren't good enough, especially since most of them are postgres specific. Now that migrations can be shipped with contrib.auth, a better solution might be possible. I'd probably prefer a functional unique index since it would be easier to maintain (rather than duplicate fields). We just need to get expression support into indexes.

Well, I hear there's this expressions API and that now it's possible to use them during the initial creation/save of an object... maybe there's some normalization people could do with that :)

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#84

Post by LifeQuestioner »

jsmeaton wrote: post #41
LifeQuestioner wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shame tbh. If they invest they could see their businesses doing even better.

We need to be communicating this to them, quantifying how their business could potentially be doing better, and offering products that they can spend money on. It's that last part that I think most OSS projects are having difficulty with.

Yeah I understand it's not as easy as i'm suggesting and I have no idea how you guys manage to do as you do even :).

I'm wondering (and of course I know little about this) if it would work doing things like: - community voting on the direction of the project or new features to be added and the top 5 get selected if there hits say 50k votes. - costs say 2-3 dollars to cast a vote. But if it's enough cash it means it won't dictate the direction of django by money or businesses and some of the cash can be spent elsewhere not just on those top 5.

So a feature could be something like "seamless upgrading from 1.8 to 1.9" which businesses might want or be willing to pay for.

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#85

Post by dump100 »

ubernostrum wrote: post #82
trymas wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I do not know some important details, but why DSF (Django Software Foundation), does not do Django consulting in the first place. They very highly likely can do the best Django consulting in the world. Secondly, maybe DSF could bake some great products for/from Django? The first ideas I have is Django specific, and user friendly: - PaaS; - analytics (as in 'new relic'); - crash and performance logging (as in 's…

It's important to remember that the DSF is a non-profit foundation registered under US laws, which restrict what it can do. Many types of "just act like a business and sell things" ideas are automatically illegal for a non-profit foundation.

Can they open/own a for profit consulting company, which is taxed as a normal company but gives all profit/dividend back to foundation?

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#86

Post by cscharenberg »

japhyr wrote: post #59

I just got around to skimming the release notes, and I'm curious about running tests in parallel. I'm looking forward to upgrading, and seeing if this has a meaningful impact on my tests. I don't have a large number of tests yet; my project runs its full test suite in ~10 seconds at the moment. But I'm well aware this should grow significantly as my project matures. Does anyone have any sense yet of how this affects…

Massive speedups once you get to thousands of tests. We 12 minute runs for the 3 apps that are part of a release. When we went parallel it reduced it by 1/6 (6 test processes).

Of course, we also had some slow tests we rewrote and had to fix some tests that did not play nice concurrently. But it was well worth it.

I don't think you'll see a big benefit for a current 10-second run because of fixed cost of startup is some of that. But running tests in parallel may reveal some bad testing practices: leaving data behind or improper mocking that cause tests to fail in parallel. Fixing all that once you get to a massive set of tests is really painful and slow becuase you have to fix them ALL before switching your testing config. So that might be a benefit to turning it on soon and growing your tests already in an parallel environment.

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#88

Post by xirdstl »

vorg wrote: post #87
Omnipresent wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still waiting on REST profile for grails.

Is anyone starting new projects in Grails, or upgrading from version 2 to 3 ? Perhaps that's why other projects are overlooking Grails nowadays.

Good question, I'm not really sure. HN isn't the right place to find out, though. There isn't a lot of interest in Grails in the Bay Area.

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#89

Post by japhyr »

cscharenberg wrote: post #86
japhyr wrote: post #59

I just got around to skimming the release notes, and I'm curious about running tests in parallel. I'm looking forward to upgrading, and seeing if this has a meaningful impact on my tests. I don't have a large number of tests yet; my project runs its full test suite in ~10 seconds at the moment. But I'm well aware this should grow significantly as my project matures. Does anyone have any sense yet of how this affects…

Massive speedups once you get to thousands of tests. We 12 minute runs for the 3 apps that are part of a release. When we went parallel it reduced it by 1/6 (6 test processes). Of course, we also had some slow tests we rewrote and had to fix some tests that did not play nice concurrently. But it was well worth it. I don't think you'll see a big benefit for a current 10-second run because of fixed cost of startup is s…

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I appreciate the perspective on what it means for large test suites, and why it's beneficial to think about this in early development stages as well.

Re: Django 1.9 Released

#90

Post by jchung »

dump100 wrote: post #85
ubernostrum wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to remember that the DSF is a non-profit foundation registered under US laws, which restrict what it can do. Many types of "just act like a business and sell things" ideas are automatically illegal for a non-profit foundation.

Can they open/own a for profit consulting company, which is taxed as a normal company but gives all profit/dividend back to foundation?

Yes they may. The proceeds of that company would be paid to the foundation.
Post reply on HN