On Thu, 2015-11-26 at 10:36 +1100, Brian May wrote: > * Similarly, if we keep Django 1.8 in Debian, Debian maintainers will > become more complacent about ensuring compatibility with future > Django > versions. The new version in experimental is likely to get > forgotten. Instead of packages fixed for 1.9, 1.10, 1.11 we will > suddenly jump from 1.8 to 1.11 (assuming this will be the next LTS, > according to the documentation it will be) in unstable and have to > fix > all version increments at once. As a result we could get more > resistance to jumping to the latest LTS version, especially if it > gets > released not long before the Debian freeze.
I need to dive a bit deeper into Django's development cycle for 1.11 LTS. If they freeze around the same time as Debian, perhaps we'd be able to start shipping 1.11~pre (&c) in unstable as soon as they start putting out alphas, then just continue to pull in new upstream versions post-freeze as they release bugfixes? I agree that it is very desirable from a security support perspective that we ship a Django LTS. -- Luke
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Python-modules-team mailing list Python-modules-team@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-modules-team
