I'm okay with keeping Python 3.5 support around. I agree it would be a bit impractical to release Django 2.0 in December without being able to run it on the most recent Ubuntu LTS.
If we dropped Python 3.5 support after Django 2.1 that would give Django (2.1) support until December 2019 (or April 2020 if you had stuck with 1.11 LTS). Hopefully most Ubuntu LTS users would be migrated to 18.04 by then and whatever Python is included there. I guess we'll evaluate it then. Thanks for the feedback! On Tuesday, December 27, 2016 at 5:33:35 PM UTC-5, Michael Manfre wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 3:52 PM Tim Graham <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Collin raised a fair point in #django-dev that Ubuntu 16.04 bundles >> Python 3.5. I guess 16.10 will include Python 3.6 -- that will be released >> before Django 2.0 in December 2017. >> >> Presumably any Python's we don't drop for 2.0 we will have to support >> until the next LTS (which means 2 more years where we can't use any Python >> 3.6+ features without extra work to support them on 3.4, 3.5), or else we >> risk stranding Django users on some Django version like 2.0 or 2.1 where >> they could have received security updates for longer if they stayed on on >> 1.11 LTS. I don't like that situation. >> >> How would you revise our Python support policy? >> > > I don't think Django should support versions of Python longer than Python > is willing to support them. If this means dropping support for a version of > Python in a non-LTS, then we should do that. As long as it is sufficiently > documented, users will be able to make an informed decision about whether > to stay on the previous LTS for longer Python version support, or move on > to our non-LTS releases to reap the rewards of the newer Django version. > Regardless what they choose, when they end up on the next LTS, they would > have likely updated Django and Python independently along the way. > > >> In my mind, the purpose of LTS is for conservative organizations that >> don't want to use the latest Python, Django, etc. Are Red Hat users on >> Python 3.4 demanding the latest Django? Maybe if Django is more aggressive >> about dropping old Pythons, those users will demand newer Pythons. >> > > At the organizations I've worked at, the purpose of LTS was to allow them > to defer migrating versions for a few years, and not to avoid using the > latest version now. They would jump on to an LTS release immediately if it > lined up with their planning. > > If Red Hat users will be stuck on 3.4, then I feel the burden for > supporting it (backporting security fixes) should fall on Red Hat, not > Django. We should make it as easy as possible for them to do so (e.g. > pre-notification), but not by adding more support burden (conditional code, > build matricies, etc.) to Django or preventing us from using newer features > from Python. > > Regards, > Michael Manfre > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/d9484416-1aa0-406c-a9c8-f8153b350482%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
