Comment 18 for bug 264191
Revision history for this message
| Lionel Porcheron (lionel.porcheron) wrote | #18 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
35a32c5
(Get the code!)
@Scott: I'm not sure there is something to do to help transitioning. Here is the page with the backward incompatible changes introduced in Django between 0.96 and 1.0:
http://
This link is in README.Debian included in the package.
As stated in the debian-release thread quoted before, and as I can attest from my experience, lot and lot of people are now using a svn snapshot of Django. 0.96 is not really widely used. I believe a 1.0 on an hardy server is more useful than a 0.96. I understand well that it is not nice to break a Django app on an existing hardy server, but if you do not want anything to be broken on your server, you should never activate backports (I'm pretty sure we all agree on that having in this thread at least three person in the Ubuntu Server Team).
@Leonel: right, I already have a local backport (I have tested on two applications I'm working on hosted on an hardy server). jquery needs a source change (replacing debhelper 7 by debhelper 6 in dependencies) but otherwise it works very well. As I said, I think it's valueable to have a Django 1.0 on hardy server.
@Eddy: would you mind to prepare a debdiff from Debian Unstable to prepare a merge for Intrepid?