This is great news! The Django project is such a wonderful project, I've enjoyed working with it over the years.
Django 2.0 released
121–130 of 177 posts
Re: Django 2.0 released
#122Wow, I remember being curious about Django a year ago. Now it's at 2.0 ! It already felt overwhelming then, but now even more so. I can't wait to check it out more. On a sidenote, I feel bad for the developers who have to migrate to Django 2.0. Hopefully it's not too much work, I know a codebase review and full update can't be fun with the business managers and customers at your throat.
The biggest challenge with upgrading Django is making sure all your Django-related dependencies have fixed things up. Django only has one paid full-time maintainer to my knowledge (Tim Graham). So given the team's limited peoplepower Only the last two releases (+LTS releases) get security updates. This means that Django 1.10 (released 18 months ago) won't get updates, so if you use any new features you're on the upgr…
I can't agree more with you.
That's the one and only reason I'll stick to the 1.11 version.
Garanty of compatibility between Django and ALL my external packages is a lot more valuable that a responsive admin panel and a new syntax for urls.
I would love "important" (yeah it's opiniated) packages move to the official Django repo (like Channels), to help reduce this risk when migrating. It's actually surprising how often I can't find the compatibility information of a Django package.
Re: Django 2.0 released
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Python - Django Ruby - Rails PHP - Laravel all nice choices
And if you don't mind the learning curve (which will make you a better thinker!), I would add Elixir - Phoenix I wish there was a complete Clojure - ???
Closest is probably Luminus, but it's really just a Leiningen build tool that can pull in your choice of libs to stitch together. It's good, and speeds up Clojure web dev, but is in no ways a framework by itself.
Re: Django 2.0 released
#124Serious question: is the famous bug of correctly annotating multiple counts fixed now?
I'm guessing you're referring to this - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6795202/django-count-in-...
Another solution not mentioned in the link is the `Subquery()` expressions added in Django 1.11. A lot of databases will optimise those just as well as the `SELECT ..., COUNT() FROM ..JOIN..` that you would write by hand.
Re: Django 2.0 released
#125Really nice! Should force more people into python3 as a side effect which is great since python2 is getting close to its EOL.
Claps for the changelog, it's always a joy to read, I haven't really used Django in some years but could easily read and see the changes. The new URL formatting is a very good add-on, was always the thing that annoyed me the most.
Re: Django 2.0 released
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. What would you say is the biggest reason for this >10x development speed difference?
Django forces you to declare everything. Lots of manual boilerplate. Example, you must define every bit of a model in order for it to work. Rails is the opposite. ActiveRecord will ‘just work’ with the database. You can run rails on an existing db for example if it follows what are widely used conventions such as lowercase model name is the table, foreign keys are foo_id, etc... This is where people fear the “magic”…
I enjoy having a well-structured framework that saves me time and does not need to be spoon-fed. But I have a theory that no programmer ever died from writing an import statement.
Re: Django 2.0 released
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Async isn’t cost free - it’s more complicated and that complexity comes at a cost. If your company has only basic needs, you have to question whether you’re providing the best value for your company by doing anything more.
> Why? Because we are getting more and more CPU cores to utilize. I don't think this trend will stop soon. The software stack will have to adjust to this and it already does. The next generation of mainstream (highlevel)languages/frameworks will be those that are designed to easily utilize CPU cores. It may be more expensive for now, but it might pay out later and I think it's much more exciting. ;)
I honestly don't understand this argument.
With 30 workers threads in Python Django, I should be able to make very good use of 6 CPUs even if the workers only run 20% of the time.
Re: Django 2.0 released
#128This is probably your best bet if you're just going to build a nice CRUD frontend for a business app, possibly with an API (via DRF). I am doing this right now on a project as it's the shortest path to a win. The API however is written in Java 8 / vertx.
One disadvantage of Django is that database providers need to know a lot about the internals of the framework. This shows once you rely on a 3rd party developed database provider, which can break even on minor upgrades.
What do you mean with a database provider?
Re: Django 2.0 released
#129[deleted]
Re: Django 2.0 released
#130Congrats to the team, this has been a long time coming. No Python2 support which is unfortunate, my Python3 migration strategy was to move to C# for my main language instead. No regrets, I like it a lot. I describe it as industrial strength. Good IDE and granted me a larger job market with Xamarin for iOS coverage. For web stuff, I'll probably be using a C# framework, or Wordpress with one of the JITs. Still, a lot o…
Why would you not want to use Python 3?