0.97 ready for deployment?

Dear Djangonauts (>.>),

With reference to the post "Development vs. Production
Servers" (http://groups.google.com/group/django-users/browse_thr
ead/
thread/1c65830ce2218039/ad8057d1296ba098?
lnk=gst&q=0.96+0.97#ad8057d1296ba098)
the recommendation seems to be to deploy the same version of
Django
that one develops in (which makes sense to me).  However, I
have to
contend with a server admin who is uncomfortable deploying
0.97
because it is marked as prerelease, and he seems convinced
that it
will bring down the entire server at random intervals.  Is
there any
real benefit to sticking to 0.96 vs. 0.97 as far as
deployment is
concerned?  I have not encountered any trouble in my
development
environment (and am not doing anything terribly complicated
anyways).

I have referred to the backwards incompatibility reference
at (http://
code.djangoproject.com/wiki/BackwardsIncompatibleChanges),
and have
determined that it wouldn't be too difficult to roll back
changes so
that the program would work under 0.96.  The question,
however, is
whether there's a compelling reason to do this (allaying the
admin's
fears notwithstanding).

Regards,

Alex.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-usersgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at htt
p://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 28-Dec-07, at 10:32 PM, Alex G wrote:

>  However, I have to
> contend with a server admin who is uncomfortable
deploying 0.97
> because it is marked as prerelease, and he seems
convinced that it
> will bring down the entire server at random intervals. 
Is there any
> real benefit to sticking to 0.96 vs. 0.97 as far as
deployment is
> concerned?

.96 is ancient. There is no such thing as .97. There is .96
and there  
is svn trunk. svn trunk has so many goodies not available in
.96 that  
it is a shame to be forced to use .96. I think there is a
good case  
for the devels to just release the latest trunk as .97 so
that  
genuine developers can get the full benefits of the latest
without  
being worried by nitpicking sysadmins and clueless suits.

-- 

regards
kg
http://lawgon.livejourn
al.com
http://nrcfosshelpline
.in/web/
Foss Conference for the common man: http://registrat
ion.fossconf.in/web/



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-usersgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at htt
p://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Sorry about the nomenclature.  I am with you as far as the
feature set
is concerned, but his issue of course, is not what the svn
trunk can
and can't do (that's outside his ambit), but with how it
will
potentially affect the http server/environment, and whether
anything
will crash.  I'm not worried, mind you, but I would like to
be able to
present reasonable assurances that none of this will happen
(before I
strong-arm him into doing it anyways).

So, from this standpoint, the svn trunk version is
functionally
equivalent to 0.96?

On Dec 28, 12:37 pm, Kenneth Gonsalves <law...thenilgiris.com> wrote:
> On 28-Dec-07, at 10:32 PM, Alex G wrote:
>
> >  However, I have to
> > contend with a server admin who is uncomfortable
deploying 0.97
> > because it is marked as prerelease, and he seems
convinced that it
> > will bring down the entire server at random
intervals.  Is there any
> > real benefit to sticking to 0.96 vs. 0.97 as far
as deployment is
> > concerned?
>
> .96 is ancient. There is no such thing as .97. There is
.96 and there
> is svn trunk. svn trunk has so many goodies not
available in .96 that
> it is a shame to be forced to use .96. I think there is
a good case
> for the devels to just release the latest trunk as .97
so that
> genuine developers can get the full benefits of the
latest without
> being worried by nitpicking sysadmins and clueless
suits.
>
> --
>
> regards
> kghttp://lawgon.livejournal.comhttp://nrcfosshelpline.i
n/web/
> Foss Conference for the common man:http://registrat
ion.fossconf.in/web/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-usersgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at htt
p://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 14:09 -0800, Alex G wrote:
> Sorry about the nomenclature.  I am with you as far as
the feature set
> is concerned, but his issue of course, is not what the
svn trunk can
> and can't do (that's outside his ambit), but with how
it will
> potentially affect the http server/environment, and
whether anything
> will crash.  I'm not worried, mind you, but I would
like to be able to
> present reasonable assurances that none of this will
happen (before I
> strong-arm him into doing it anyways).

There is no more danger of current subversion trunk
"crashing" a server
than with 0.96.

Regards,
Malcolm

-- 
Always try to be modest and be proud of it! 
http://www.pointy-s
tick.com/blog/


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-usersgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at htt
p://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

> but with how it will potentially affect the http
server/environment,

Sometimes the best way to prove it is to show it.

Are you running Apache/mod_python? If so, configure Apache
for another
virtual host and add a path to the alternate django version
in the
PythonPath line in Apache. I think mod_python runs a
different
interpreter for each virtual host, but you can always force
the issue
with the PythonInterpreter directive.

Something like this:

PythonPath "['/var/www/testing/',
'/path/to/alternate/django'] +
sys.path"
PythonInterpreter somename

Then you can do tests and show that it is stable. This will
have zero
impact on any sites running 0.96.

  HTH,
  Peter
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-usersgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at htt
p://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---