Django Developers Survery Results • Hacker News Board

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#11

Post by shabda » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 2:38 AM UTC

neokya wrote: post #3

jtchang wrote: post #2

This is an awesome survey. I am a avid fan of Django and have been using it for over 4 years. I found it amusing people are split between 6 and 12 month for release cycles.

Thus new release cycle will be 8 months, middle ground. There are few other changes for release, notably SemVer adoption. For detailed Roadmap, see https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2015/jun/25/roadmap/

“A good compromise leaves everyone angry.”

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#12

Post by mianos » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:30 AM UTC

It's quite interesting that the ORM comes in first in the question on value. Ahead of routing and views. Once I learnt and used SQLAlchemy, I think the Django ORM is lesser component than the routing/view processing, which I find much of a much-ness in terms of the other major frameworks. That said, in django, batteries are included, and spares, and rechargables, and a charger!

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#13

Post by ubernostrum » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 5:51 AM UTC

simonlebo wrote: post #8

I've been starting a few Django projects during the last few years and I have had trouble finding packages that are compatible with the latest versions. Maybe their release cycle is too fast for all the 3d party apps to keep track? Also I find that some of these 3d party apps use a notation like >= Django 1.X but that's not really true because of backwards incompatibility. A clearer way to know what exact version Dja…

I requested, and the maintainers added a while back, trove classifiers on the Python Package Index to indicate compatibility with Django versions (similar to what was already available for Python versions and some other popular frameworks).

Currently 112 packages on the index classify as Django 1.8 compatible:

https://pypi.python.org/pypi?:action=browse&c=605

So encourage package maintainers to use those classifiers, and you'll be able to tell easily which packages are and aren't compatible :)

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#14

Post by Ciantic » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 9:00 AM UTC

I've used Django a lot, however for past few years I've wanted to transition to type safe languages. Python should get serious about static analysis, e.g. mypy or some such, they provide a great way to increase productivity, and help you refactor if something changes.

I tried with Atom and (jedi) plugin, get this `CharField([Ctrl+Space]`, it fills me with `CharField( * args, * * kwargs)`, sigh.

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#15

Post by eeZi » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 10:15 AM UTC

Ciantic wrote: post #14

I've used Django a lot, however for past few years I've wanted to transition to type safe languages. Python should get serious about static analysis, e.g. mypy or some such, they provide a great way to increase productivity, and help you refactor if something changes. I tried with Atom and (jedi) plugin, get this `CharField([Ctrl+Space]`, it fills me with `CharField( * args, * * kwargs)`, sigh.

https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#16

Post by raverbashing » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 10:28 AM UTC

Ciantic wrote: post #14

I've used Django a lot, however for past few years I've wanted to transition to type safe languages. Python should get serious about static analysis, e.g. mypy or some such, they provide a great way to increase productivity, and help you refactor if something changes. I tried with Atom and (jedi) plugin, get this `CharField([Ctrl+Space]`, it fills me with `CharField( * args, * * kwargs)`, sigh.

> Python should get serious about static analysis

Then it's not python

I love people trying to shove static typing onto python when there's a multitude of other choices to pick.

The alternatives suck exactly because of that.

If you want static typing go use Java, Go, etc.

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#17

Post by rattray » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 11:17 AM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #16

Ciantic wrote: post #14

I've used Django a lot, however for past few years I've wanted to transition to type safe languages. Python should get serious about static analysis, e.g. mypy or some such, they provide a great way to increase productivity, and help you refactor if something changes. I tried with Atom and (jedi) plugin, get this `CharField([Ctrl+Space]`, it fills me with `CharField( * args, * * kwargs)`, sigh.

> Python should get serious about static analysis Then it's not python I love people trying to shove static typing onto python when there's a multitude of other choices to pick. The alternatives suck exactly because of that . If you want static typing go use Java, Go, etc.

What about optional, inferred, lightweight static typing? Do those things ever suck? What would be bad about that?

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#18

Post by throwaway77632 » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 11:39 AM UTC

Missed the survey but going to express my feelings here hoping that they will still be read. I like the opinionated, batteries included approach of Django a lot. My major gripe with it is that it only takes you so far. There's a ton of ever expanding documentation out there how to make your first app. Whether it's the official tutorial, another one or a workshop. But when looking to build something less trivial—not just bigger, but more complicated—I don't know where to look for in-depth guidance. Compared to Rails there really aren't too many books out there. I should give an honorable mention of Two Scoops of Django, but the style of many loose bits of good advice still doesn't help me with the bigger picture. Getting Started with Django made me hopeful, but somehow it never got past the first few episodes which again cover just the basics. Where to go after that? Just asking questions doesn't cut it. If the question is too broad, you're referred to the documentation, or the answer is too broad as well. And asking a specific, answerable question is hard when you're not comfortable with the technology yet. Either way, it takes too long to ask all the questions that arise and wait for the variety of answers that might follow, compared to reading a book with well-worked examples or so that form a coherent whole. I'm starting to feel that the only way to get fluent in Django would be to get a job in an experienced Django shop, which IMO should not be the case. On IRC in particular I sense an off-putting attitude that "we experienced Django developers know how to do it right" without really making that knowledge accessible to others. The documentation isn't by far as opinionated as the framework itself. As a result, I end up trying things that in the end can't be made to work well.

TLDR; I would like Django to be more accessible not just to beginners but especially to advanced starters.

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#19

Post by SudoAlex » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 12:47 PM UTC

ubernostrum wrote: post #13

simonlebo wrote: post #8

I've been starting a few Django projects during the last few years and I have had trouble finding packages that are compatible with the latest versions. Maybe their release cycle is too fast for all the 3d party apps to keep track? Also I find that some of these 3d party apps use a notation like >= Django 1.X but that's not really true because of backwards incompatibility. A clearer way to know what exact version Dja…

I requested, and the maintainers added a while back, trove classifiers on the Python Package Index to indicate compatibility with Django versions (similar to what was already available for Python versions and some other popular frameworks). Currently 112 packages on the index classify as Django 1.8 compatible: https://pypi.python.org/pypi?:action=browse&c=605 So encourage package maintainers to use those classifiers,…

There needs to be more promotion of this, as this is the first time I've heard about the version specific classifiers.

I'd have to agree with simonlebo - it's getting harder to find packages compatible with the latest version. Some of these are just slow at updating, but will eventually get around to it at some point. However given how old Django is now, there's going to be plenty of old projects which clutter up search results for packages which are no longer maintained.

Maybe djangopackages.com could add support/filtering to hide outdated Django projects. Or perhaps the encouragement could come in a more official way with a Django Package Index - a site which uses PyPI data, but with filtering biased towards the current released version of Django to encourage people who maintain those packages to get a new version out with support for the latest version.

Re: Django Developers Survery Results

#20

Post by knes » Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 1:20 PM UTC

I see a lot of feedback about how difficult it is to use websockets or add real-time features to an Django app. I work at Pusher (http://pusher.com) and this is exactly what we do. We make it dead simple for any developers to use websockets and handle the scaling and maintenance for them.

We even have custom libraries for Django such as Django-pusherable https://github.com/pusher/django-pusherable

Associated blog post at https://blog.pusher.com/django-pusherable/