Django 2.0 released, and what it means to you

[Matthias Runge]

Hello,

tl;dr if you're not maintaining/using a Django related package,
you can safely skip this message.

Django 2.0 was released quite recently. While it is mostly compatible with
earlier versions, the SIGNIFICANT change is, to drop support for Python 2.

I'm intending to update Django in Rawhide to 2.0 in 2 weeks. If you're
maintaining a package depending on Django, please make sure to disable
the python2 subpackage. Please keep in mind, you'll also need proper
obsoletes.

If there is any bug, blocker, whatever connected to this change,
please make also sure to report it in bugzilla and
make your bug a blocker for[1].

Thank you,
Matthias

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1494761

[Petr Viktorin]

On 12/05/2017 09:19 AM, Matthias Runge wrote:
> Hello,
>
> tl;dr if you're not maintaining/using a Django related package,
> you can safely skip this message.
>
> Django 2.0 was released quite recently. While it is mostly compatible with
> earlier versions, the SIGNIFICANT change is, to drop support for Python 2.
>
> I'm intending to update Django in Rawhide to 2.0 in 2 weeks. If you're
> maintaining a package depending on Django, please make sure to disable
> the python2 subpackage. Please keep in mind, you'll also need proper
> obsoletes.
>
> If there is any bug, blocker, whatever connected to this change,
> please make also sure to report it in bugzilla and
> make your bug a blocker for[1].

Hi,
Another option is to create a new "python2-django" package containing 
the latest Django 1.x code (which is still supported upstream as LTS). 
That would mean dependent packages would have until April 2020 to drop 
Python 2.
If that would help, let me know and I'll package it.

[Matthias Runge]

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 10:45:54AM +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> > Django 2.0 was released quite recently. While it is mostly compatible with
> > earlier versions, the SIGNIFICANT change is, to drop support for Python 2.
> >
> > I'm intending to update Django in Rawhide to 2.0 in 2 weeks. If you're
> > maintaining a package depending on Django, please make sure to disable
> > the python2 subpackage. Please keep in mind, you'll also need proper
> > obsoletes.
> >
> > If there is any bug, blocker, whatever connected to this change,
> > please make also sure to report it in bugzilla and
> > make your bug a blocker for[1].
>
> Hi,
> Another option is to create a new "python2-django" package containing the
> latest Django 1.x code (which is still supported upstream as LTS). That
> would mean dependent packages would have until April 2020 to drop Python 2.
> If that would help, let me know and I'll package it.

Interesting idea, but how would you handle the mandatory python2 package
for it then? Would that require some FPC decision?

I would expect the python3-django would get upgraded at least a few
times until 2020.

Matthias

[Miro Hrončok]

> > Django 2.0 was released quite recently. While it is mostly compatible 
> > with
> > earlier versions, the SIGNIFICANT change is, to drop support for 
> > Python 2.

Maybe a Fedora Change coordinating this would be nice?
> Hi,
> Another option is to create a new "python2-django" package containing 
> the latest Django 1.x code (which is still supported upstream as LTS). 
> That would mean dependent packages would have until April 2020 to drop 
> Python 2.
> If that would help, let me know and I'll package it.

See python2-ipython package for how we did it there.

My opinion here is to drop python2-django from Fedora and don't package 
python2-django. Removing Python 2 packages slowly before 2020 is a good 
thing. It will remind packagers that we are serious about this and it 
could give us some experience with this kind of stuff, that can be 
reused once python2 will be removed.

Note that python2-ipython is useful when testing stuff that needs
to support legacy Python interactively.

When someone needs to support Django stuff on Python 2, they can still 
use virtualenvs and pip (and hopefully also pipenv soon), which is the 
recommended way for development anyway.

This IMHO boils to one question: Are there **apps** packaged in Fedora 
that require Django on Python 2? And if so, can they be switched to 
Python 3?

If there are some Django Python 2 apps that would need this, we can 
package python2-django (in a way as a compat package for those).

Those are packages that require python(2)-django and are themselves not 
prefixed with python(2)-django:

cobbler-web
fts-monitoring
gramps-webapp
graphite-web
kobo-admin
kobo-django
kobo-hub
pony
pulp-server

I suggest we go trough them and see. At least the kobo thing is probably 
being ported to 3 by Lumír (CC'ed)

Even if we and up having python2-django, I suggest we remove all the 
unneeded python2-django-wahtnots anyway and only keep the ones used by 
the apps.

[Lumir Balhar]

On 12/05/2017 04:27 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Django 2.0 was released quite recently. While it is mostly 
> > > compatible with
> > > earlier versions, the SIGNIFICANT change is, to drop support for 
> > > Python 2.
>
> Maybe a Fedora Change coordinating this would be nice?
> > Hi,
> > Another option is to create a new "python2-django" package containing 
> > the latest Django 1.x code (which is still supported upstream as 
> > LTS). That would mean dependent packages would have until April 2020 
> > to drop Python 2.
> > If that would help, let me know and I'll package it.
>
> See python2-ipython package for how we did it there.
>
> My opinion here is to drop python2-django from Fedora and don't 
> package python2-django. Removing Python 2 packages slowly before 2020 
> is a good thing. It will remind packagers that we are serious about 
> this and it could give us some experience with this kind of stuff, 
> that can be reused once python2 will be removed.
>
> Note that python2-ipython is useful when testing stuff that needs
> to support legacy Python interactively.
>
> When someone needs to support Django stuff on Python 2, they can still 
> use virtualenvs and pip (and hopefully also pipenv soon), which is the 
> recommended way for development anyway.
>
> This IMHO boils to one question: Are there **apps** packaged in Fedora 
> that require Django on Python 2? And if so, can they be switched to 
> Python 3?
>
> If there are some Django Python 2 apps that would need this, we can 
> package python2-django (in a way as a compat package for those).
>
> Those are packages that require python(2)-django and are themselves 
> not prefixed with python(2)-django:
>
> cobbler-web
> fts-monitoring
> gramps-webapp
> graphite-web
> kobo-admin
> kobo-django
> kobo-hub
> pony
> pulp-server
>
> I suggest we go trough them and see. At least the kobo thing is 
> probably being ported to 3 by Lumír (CC'ed)

Kobo is currently tested with Django 1.6 and 1.8. The codebase is ported 
to Python 3 but it needs to be modified to support Django >= 1.11. There 
are some issues but I don't know Django well enough to fix them.

I am not a maintainer nor a user of Kobo but I think that Kobo will need 
python2-django in Fedora.
> Even if we and up having python2-django, I suggest we remove all the 
> unneeded python2-django-wahtnots anyway and only keep the ones used by 
> the apps.

[Matthias Runge]

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 09:56:28AM +0100, Lumir Balhar wrote:
> On 12/05/2017 04:27 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > Maybe a Fedora Change coordinating this would be nice?

probably a good idea.
> > Those are packages that require python(2)-django and are themselves not
> > prefixed with python(2)-django:
> >
> > cobbler-web
> > fts-monitoring
> > gramps-webapp
> > graphite-web
> > kobo-admin
> > kobo-django
> > kobo-hub
> > pony
> > pulp-server
> >
> > I suggest we go trough them and see. At least the kobo thing is probably
> > being ported to 3 by Lumír (CC'ed)

graphite-web requires Django <= 1.11.99, but has been ported to python3.
> Kobo is currently tested with Django 1.6 and 1.8. The codebase is ported to
> Python 3 but it needs to be modified to support Django >= 1.11. There are
> some issues but I don't know Django well enough to fix them.
>
> I am not a maintainer nor a user of Kobo but I think that Kobo will need
> python2-django in Fedora.
> > Even if we and up having python2-django, I suggest we remove all the
> > unneeded python2-django-wahtnots anyway and only keep the ones used by
> > the apps.

Yes, this makes sense.

Going the safe route, we should add the python2 package based on
django-1.11.x and current apps would continue to work.

Thoughts?

Best,
Matthias

[Nicolas Chauvet]

2017-12-06 10:26 GMT+01:00 Matthias Runge :
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 09:56:28AM +0100, Lumir Balhar wrote:
> > On 12/05/2017 04:27 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Maybe a Fedora Change coordinating this would be nice?
>
> probably a good idea.
> > > Those are packages that require python(2)-django and are themselves not
> > > prefixed with python(2)-django:
> > >
> > > cobbler-web
> > > fts-monitoring
> > > gramps-webapp
> > > graphite-web
> > > kobo-admin
> > > kobo-django
> > > kobo-hub
> > > pony
> > > pulp-server
> > >
> > > I suggest we go trough them and see. At least the kobo thing is probably
> > > being ported to 3 by Lumír (CC'ed)
>
> graphite-web requires Django <= 1.11.99, but has been ported to python3.
> > Kobo is currently tested with Django 1.6 and 1.8. The codebase is ported to
> > Python 3 but it needs to be modified to support Django >= 1.11. There are
> > some issues but I don't know Django well enough to fix them.
> >
> > I am not a maintainer nor a user of Kobo but I think that Kobo will need
> > python2-django in Fedora.
> > > Even if we and up having python2-django, I suggest we remove all the
> > > unneeded python2-django-wahtnots anyway and only keep the ones used by
> > > the apps.
>
> Yes, this makes sense.
>
> Going the safe route, we should add the python2 package based on
> django-1.11.x and current apps would continue to work.
>
> Thoughts?

cobbler-web would benefit from using such python2-django.
(I have a pending PR upstream to support current django-1.xx).

Thx

[Piotr Popieluch]

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Nicolas Chauvet  wrote:
> 2017-12-06 10:26 GMT+01:00 Matthias Runge :
> > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 09:56:28AM +0100, Lumir Balhar wrote:
> > > On 12/05/2017 04:27 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > > Maybe a Fedora Change coordinating this would be nice?
> >
> > probably a good idea.
> > > > Those are packages that require python(2)-django and are themselves
>
> not
> > > > prefixed with python(2)-django:
> > > >
> > > > graphite-web

Last week a patch got merged to Graphite-web to support Python 3.  Not sure
when Django 2 will be supported.

[Matthias Runge]

On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 10:26:11AM +0100, Matthias Runge wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 09:56:28AM +0100, Lumir Balhar wrote:
> > On 12/05/2017 04:27 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> > > Maybe a Fedora Change coordinating this would be nice?
>
> probably a good idea.

To follow-up on this, I'm drafting a change[1]. Since my
responsibilities changed, this has a quite low priority for me.
Any help is greatly appreciated!

Best,
Matthias
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mrunge/Django20

[Miro Hrončok]

On 7.12.2017 10:56, Matthias Runge wrote:
> To follow-up on this, I'm drafting a change[1]. Since my
> responsibilities changed, this has a quite low priority for me.
> Any help is greatly appreciated!
>
> Best,
> Matthias
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mrunge/Django20

Today, we proposed https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Django20 and 
set it to Ready For Wrangler.

[Nicolas Chauvet]

2017-12-12 16:17 GMT+01:00 Miro Hrončok :
> On 7.12.2017 10:56, Matthias Runge wrote:
> > To follow-up on this, I'm drafting a change[1]. Since my
> > responsibilities changed, this has a quite low priority for me.
> > Any help is greatly appreciated!
> >
> > Best,
> > Matthias
> > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mrunge/Django20

It would be more simple to introduce a separate python2-django given
this package namespace is free.
It would just need to be bump at version-release: 1.11.5-2.fc28
because python(2)-django sub-package in f27 is currently at 1.11.5-1
This could even be introduced in epel7 (if python is recent enought
there, but then this is a separate issue).

Thx

[Miro Hrončok]

On 12.12.2017 16:52, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> 2017-12-12 16:17 GMT+01:00 Miro Hrončok :
> > On 7.12.2017 10:56, Matthias Runge wrote:
> > > To follow-up on this, I'm drafting a change[1]. Since my
> > > responsibilities changed, this has a quite low priority for me.
> > > Any help is greatly appreciated!
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Matthias
> > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mrunge/Django20
>
> It would be more simple to introduce a separate python2-django given
> this package namespace is free.

We are aware of that and we are deliberately not doing that.
See the motivation in Detailed Description [2].

Note that providing it is our contingency plan [3].

[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Django20#Detailed_Description
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Django20#Contingency_Plan
> It would just need to be bump at version-release: 1.11.5-2.fc28
> because python(2)-django sub-package in f27 is currently at 1.11.5-1
> This could even be introduced in epel7 (if python is recent enought
> there, but then this is a separate issue).
>
> Thx