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

Django 1.6 beta 1 released

djangoproject.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 72 posts

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#51

Post by jeffasinger »

euroclydon wrote: post #20
adamauckland wrote: post #15

> Does Django have a bright future in a world that's moving heavily client side Where are you getting the data for the client from? Django-Rest-Framework is a very convenient way to get data down into the browser layer from a DB.

I think this is an area where ASP.NET MVC excels because, while REST is nice, you also have to consider web sockets, and I have not seen good web socket support in Django, where ASP.NET has SignalR which is loads easier to configure than a custom solution with Django and Nginx/Apache. Not to mention that SignalR has very nice degradation support on both ends when web sockets are not available.

The root of this problem is that WSGI doesn't play nicely with asynchronous stuff.

Socket.io for node.js is very awesome for stuff like that.

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#52

Post by acjohnson55 »

gtaylor wrote: post #5
acjohnson55 wrote: post #4

I really enjoy working with Django, but in many ways, it seems to be staying pretty vanilla while other technologies head in more experimental directions. Does Django have a bright future in a world that's moving heavily client side, or will it be relegated to a relatively bland corner of the web world?

We've got a more complex application (Pathwright) running Django, and we're currently going much more heavy client side. Nothing about Django keeps you from doing this, and there are some excellent third party apps that actually make it very easy (django-rest-framework is awesome). > Django have a bright future in a world that's moving heavily client side, or will it be relegated to a relatively bland corner of the w…

I'm not seeking controversy--I really enjoy Django development. It's just that I don't often hear about startups choosing to build in Django (well, besides mine), instead, going with Rails, which seems to have a more active and forward-looking developer community and more aggressive, or flashy new-school stuff like Node/Scala/Go/whatever. I guess what I'm trying to ask is, what is holding Django back? Is it just fashion, or are there more serious perceived shortcomings?

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#53

Post by eclipticplane »

pvnick wrote: post #14

I'm currently working with Django for a client's project I'm developing. Coming off a LAMP stack binge, the technology itself has been an absolute delight. I've been given the directive to use South to manage the data model, but for future projects I was hoping somebody with more experience can give some insights as to what you've found works and what doesn't work. I'm not the biggest fan of South, but maybe it's jus…

South is pretty great for very simplistic migrations. However, it does not issue DDL efficiently. For example, if you're adding two columns to a table, it will issue two separate ALTER TABLE statements. Depending on your database and table size, that can take twice as long as needed. It can really add up when your tables start hitting millions of records.

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#54

Post by bhauer »

fotcorn wrote: post #2

Integrated connection pooling makes this release a no-brainer upgrade on release day.

Thank goodness. Not being a user of the framework, the lack of database connectivity persistence in Django was among the most surprising elements of setting up the initial test cases in our framework benchmarks project. We've since then added a Postgres test with a connection pool, but I still have the memory of that surprise from the first round.

(Incidentally, I hope to get this new version into Round 7 of our project.)

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#55

Post by bad_user »

euroclydon wrote: post #50
bad_user wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if you're talking about alternatives that do asynchronism, Comet and Web Sockets well, the most convenient framework I ever used is Play 2.1 The framework is said to be reactive , meaning that you can build components that react to events asynchronously. The architecture is completely awesome, as Akka actors are baked in and the protocols are modelled with Futures and Iteratees, an FP concept for sane I/O. Thin…

I've heard it's revolutionary! How do you host Play in production?

We are using Amazon's EC2 for a huge-traffic web service (because ELB with auto-scalling has been working great for us) and Heroku for auxiliary services.

Deployment to Heroku works out of the box btw.

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#57

Post by euroclydon »

bad_user wrote: post #55
euroclydon wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard it's revolutionary! How do you host Play in production?

We are using Amazon's EC2 for a huge-traffic web service (because ELB with auto-scalling has been working great for us) and Heroku for auxiliary services. Deployment to Heroku works out of the box btw.

I mean, which web server? What is the built-in start/stage server built on? Can you place it behind Nginx?

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#58

Post by gtaylor »

acjohnson55 wrote: post #52
gtaylor wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've got a more complex application (Pathwright) running Django, and we're currently going much more heavy client side. Nothing about Django keeps you from doing this, and there are some excellent third party apps that actually make it very easy (django-rest-framework is awesome). > Django have a bright future in a world that's moving heavily client side, or will it be relegated to a relatively bland corner of the w…

I'm not seeking controversy--I really enjoy Django development. It's just that I don't often hear about startups choosing to build in Django (well, besides mine), instead, going with Rails, which seems to have a more active and forward-looking developer community and more aggressive, or flashy new-school stuff like Node/Scala/Go/whatever. I guess what I'm trying to ask is, what is holding Django back? Is it just fash…

> I guess what I'm trying to ask is, what is holding Django back?

Why do you think it's being held back? I'm just not seeing the barriers in using newer tech. We stay pretty cutting edge, and haven't had any issues doing so with Django.

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#59

Post by gtaylor »

jonknee wrote: post #18
zalew wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he's probably referring to the ever-recurring topic of django not integrating front-end libs out of the box (which I in particular support).

I support that too, but I think Django should provide some default API endpoint support (like Django Rest Framework).

I'd be pretty miffed if they did this. You need only look at the comments contrib to see an example of something that was OK'ish when it was incorporated, but has languished since then. Now I question the need to even have it in contrib.

We don't have to bake components in for them to be excellent. rest-framework in particular moves ridiculously fast, and being separate from Django lets them do that. Also, if in the future something even better comes out, I can easily switch to it.

Re: Django 1.6 beta 1 released

#60

Post by gtaylor »

Nagyman wrote: post #37
mixmastamyk wrote: post #35

Persistent database connections :). Glad to see the objections finally fall by the wayside. Still no update for the homely admin app? Would love to have it use bootstrap (or similar) to offload look and feel to those focused on it. One extra thing to do in every Django app is to change the ugly yellow on cyan title bar. I know it is already possible with apps, but then it means one more thing to fix on upgrade.

FWIW, admin2 is under active development and moving forward. I don't know if the intention is to replace the existing admin, but as it's not backwards compatible there will be some effort to upgrade if you've completed any serious customization. https://github.com/twoscoops/django-admin2

I wish the admin started as an external project and stayed that way (for the sake of getting some love and attention). But of course, then we wouldn't be able to show shiny tutorial videos and people wouldn't get it automagically.

Watching this with interest.

Post reply on HN