Django 3
docs.djangoproject.com
Django 3
1–10 of 196 posts
Re: Django 3
#2Release announcement: https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2019/dec/02/django-3-re...
(The release note erroneously still show the "Under Development" banner.)
Re: Django 3
#3Re: Django 3
#4Groovy. I am excited to try out the new ASGI goodness. Last time I used Django Channels it was a constant struggle to tune it, prevent it from becoming deadlocked, etc. And the transition from Channels 1.x to 2.x was also not pleasant. I hope that Django proper did things better/differently.
Re: Django 3
#5Does Python still have performance issues? That's always been my concern when considering its adoption.
Re: Django 3
#6Right as I was just about to start a new Django project...
The thought going through my mind right now is "I wonder if there is some way of creating a Django project and make it resilient to future Django updates and releases with minimum fuss?"
I've had to deal with ongoing and inherited legacy projects which run on Python 2.7, use the long-deprecated Pylons, for which there is no easy upgrade path other than a total re-write in less deprecated technologies. No practical way to convert that Pylons project to Pyramid, for example.
I guess the answer to my thought above is to "Not do/use anything /too exciting/ when creating your Django project" - i.e. only use the most basic and generic Django features, but even then what's to say those won't get deprecated in favour of some new exciting replacement?
I guess that's one of the dilemmas developers have day to day?
Re: Django 3
#7Does Python still have performance issues? That's always been my concern when considering its adoption.
It's always prioritized delivery speed and quality over raw performance. If you want an ultra optimized web framework it will always be the wrong choice - it was never designed for that.
Re: Django 3
#8Does Python still have performance issues? That's always been my concern when considering its adoption.
nothing significant changed.
Re: Django 3
#9Right as I was just about to start a new Django project... The thought going through my mind right now is "I wonder if there is some way of creating a Django project and make it resilient to future Django updates and releases with minimum fuss?" I've had to deal with ongoing and inherited legacy projects which run on Python 2.7, use the long-deprecated Pylons, for which there is no easy upgrade path other than a tota…
Well, there were a few things in the 2.x series (e.g. naming of default auth views) which ended up breaking existing code and needed updates.
But in all honesty: django is the project I would worry about the least here. Even when stuff is deprecated, an improved alternative tends to exist and is pretty well documented. The level of care that goes into each release is very high; the number of brown bag bugs that get out very low. If you want a quiet life, django is a very good fit.
Re: Django 3
#10Right as I was just about to start a new Django project... The thought going through my mind right now is "I wonder if there is some way of creating a Django project and make it resilient to future Django updates and releases with minimum fuss?" I've had to deal with ongoing and inherited legacy projects which run on Python 2.7, use the long-deprecated Pylons, for which there is no easy upgrade path other than a tota…
> i.e. only use the most basic and generic Django features
I don't think you need to do this with Django. Features are generally very mature, stable, and are not deprecated frequently. When they are, they are deprecated years in advance with long term support still provided.
In all honesty, I've seen very few projects run feature lifecycles as well as Django. I'd use everything you need to in it without concern about this.