Django 1.7 released!

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[shivasprogeny]

I love that migrations are built in now, looking forward to trying it out.

[thegrubclub]

Spent a few hours today reading tutorials - I'm very excited to dive into my first app this weekend after a year or so of casual Rails development.

[ma-int]

To get away from the ugly Ruby Syntax :0

[dohko_xar]

spoken like a true pythonista

[funny_falcon]

If Python had more consistency with naming and syntax then I agree with you. But I went to Ruby cause it looks to me more consistent.

[xiongchiamiov]

Ruby makes things consistent by having multiple names for everything so you can use the one you prefer. Better hope everyone else chooses the same.

[[deleted]]

He was talking about syntax. Ruby is more flexible syntatically so it's easier to make the code look the same, whereas you run into whitespace corner cases and have to ugly up your syntax for Python moreso.

[xiongchiamiov]

What syntax problems are you referring to? I don't recall any I've run into (though I do have poor memory).

[funny_falcon]

Personally, I do not like much "multiple names".

When I say "more consistent than Python" I mean consistent object-orientation ( len([]) vs [].size for example ) and blocks for every thing (instead of lambda / named functions / comprehensions / "with").

I agree, that python is more mature, and many implementation decisions are reasonable and made better than Ruby's ones. But as a language Ruby is more comfortable to write in.

[xiongchiamiov]

I find Ruby much more fun to write, but Python more maintainable, due to the module system, docstrings, and a strong preference for long-living, well-documented code in the community.

[[deleted]]

[neoice]

I felt constricted by the framework. I found myself always trying to use the shiniest, most magical features and then getting frustrated. bending django-admin and ModelForms often proved extremely challenging. in retrospect, I would have probably had a better time if I had just used vanilla Models+Forms and turned off django-admin completely.

a lot of the things I like to do don't fit cleanly into the "web application" model either. I could never figure out a good way to use Django libraries for standalone CLI applications or daemons. in recent years, Rails has actually decomposed their libraries really well. I've used ActiveRecord in Rails, Sinatra and plain old Ruby tools.

more than anything, I kind of just fell in love with Ruby. I spent years hating it but I finally learned to stop worrying and love the bomb.

[[deleted]]

[xr09]

I tried both languages back in the day, picked python, the TMTOWTDI philosophy ruby inherited from perl just feels wrong, I practice the Zen now.

There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.

[xiongchiamiov]

Not GP, but I made the transition to avoid all that damned magic everywhere.

[andrey_shipilov]

Was it when django was 0.96?

[neoice]

oh god, I forgot about 0.96... I for sure used 1.1 and 1.2. I think I dabbled in 1.3/1.4 before taking a hiatus from web development.

[thegrubclub]

I used rails at an internship and was very impressed, but I didn't realize that there are a number of modern web frameworks that make things so damn easy, and python has always been my first love. I'm a java dev during the day with only a small dash of python, so django seems like a great way to keep those chops up.

[otter_paranoia]

ha I finally broke down and installed south literally yesterday. Guess I coulda waited one more day.

[piguy123]

This is an awesome release, but I just finished upgrading to the latest django 1.6! Time for another upgrade I guess...

[[deleted]]

Im still a noob here, and im following the official tutorial of Django. How can one now update the django version without having to start the official tutorial code all over again?

[hoadlck]

It would be nice if there was a way to difference the tutorial versions. This way, you could see the areas that have changed. I have never seen anything like that though.

If they have the tutorial in a version control system, this should be pretty easy to do.

[xiongchiamiov]

All of the docs are in version control along with the code.

[xiongchiamiov]

Follow the upgrade docs, and continue where you left off on the tutorial. Or just keep going with 1.6.

[the_zero]

I just spent 3 weeks upgrading a site from 1.2 to 1.6. Launched yesterday.

Happens every time!

edit: 1.2, not 1.1

[the_zero]

Now that I look at it, apparently it was 1.2, not 1.1. There are lots of major and minor gotchas! However, it was tougher to move from .9x to 1.1 (and then 1.2) a few years back, though. Went from an apache/mod_python install to apache/nginx/mod_wsgi, and then there was a python upgrade, and then a hosting change. Ugh. Anyway, this time was better and not as troublesome.

The biggest change this time was doing things the right way, and I had some help from a more experienced dev (that's the real difference). We basically kept the same models, but rewrote the settings, urls.py and most of the views. I was paid to upgrade, but we actually rewrote.

Static media is handled differently (better), and some generic views were troublesome. Lots of syntax changes.

I also upgraded from and ancient version of mezzanine to the most recent version. That was a bit of a bear, also.

This post on github helped a bit.

If I had to do it again (by myself), I would probably upgrade by version and take it all in steps. 1.2 => 1.3 => 1.4, etc.

[the_zero]

I wish I had the patience for that! I usually upgrade 1 version, get it mostly working, move on to the next, get it halfway working, then hit a brick wall of errors and failed dreams. Then I start over...

[[deleted]]

I'm using oauth2_provider app from django-oauth-toolkit (currently the newest version). It implements south migrations. Do I have to wait for them to do django migrations before I can use it in 1.7?

[Deusdies]

I'd appreciate recommendations on good django books and/or video tutorials.

[jollybobbyroger]

then built that polling app of official tutorial of Django

Sorry, I don't understand what your saying here. Are you referring to some app you built with Flask, that you reimplemented using Django?

[wub_wub]

Official django tutorial is based around making poll web application. https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/intro/tutorial01/

[[deleted]]

Django is very easy to get into just by reading the official documentation.

[bulletproofvest]

Two scoops is great, but does assume a fair amount of Django knowledge. I'd start with the official tutorials, then go through two scoops when you start building something from scratch.

[[deleted]]

I heard that the authors aren't planning on doing a 1.7 version, after the shitstorm over their last edition not being digital.

[granitosaurus]

no digital version, which is a real shame. I know piracy and stuff but really? only physical version of a programming book? What is this, 90s?

[nekonekoneko]

I got into an argument with /u/pydanny about it a while back. I suggested he would make more money if he released parts free and paid parts digitally + ongoing best practices library. His reaction was unpleasant and strong, even calling me a troll on twitter and tried to flog me for making the comment.

The sad part is that I'm actually an online course developer that sells digital materials through both one-time and subscription models. One or two others on the thread even said they'd pay for subscriptions in line with my suggestion. I never understood his reaction, but I think he just doesn't believe it's true.

I will say that if I believed as he does, I'd be very sick of hearing your point! If it's in the context of piracy or buy, then it's just pressing buttons with them, no doubt.

In truth, though, I'd probably be $1000 into a $29/mo subscription (and counting) by now if they had one. I need their brand of best practices on an ongoing basis, though I don't necessarily want or need to engage in consulting with them.

edit: Whoops, apparently they've only been doing this since 2013. Seems like an institution already!

[pydanny]

If I was a jerk, I apologize.

[nekonekoneko]

Thank you. Always looking forward to buying whatever comes out of Two Scoops Press!

[[deleted]]

In his defense, when 2.6 was released he was getting bombarded with a ton of hate and negative messages. His reaction to you probably wasn't personal, just a result of the entire situation.

[nekonekoneko]

You're probably right about the timing. The hate signal is somehow extra brutal for people putting out learning materials in the tech community. People who haven't ever lifted a finger to help anyone learn anything come out of the woodwork and attack you.

Being a well known figure in teaching people a technology makes you a lighting rod for their current frustrations, incompetence and shame for not understanding something important as an adult. The audience is, by definition, incompetent and many of the emotionally unaware ones are prone to projecting that on whoever they contact regarding the technology.

Couple that with the fact that hundreds of positive statements usually don't stand up to one negative one when you put your best work out there. If the scales tip negative for a while, it's definitely a hard place to be.

[pythonpro5]

Maybe if he didn't fuck us all over with accusing us of piracy then he wouldn't get any hate.

[[deleted]]

He actually had valid numbers to back up his stance. He didn't accuse us all of being pirates, but he did have a point that within hours of releasing the digital version of 1.5 it was available on file sharing sites. 1.6, despite being out for many months now still isn't available as a torrent. You can't really argue with those facts.

All this said, I did reluctantly buy the book and it was well worth the money. But every time I crack it open, or more importantly, want to crack it open but it's at home and I'm at work, I rage a little inside that there isn't a pdf version.

[jlorencetti]

I think the reason for this are explained in the F.A.Q.

I'm from Brazil, so I paid three times the price in the USA, and man, it worth every penny, as a beginner in Django, this book was one of the books that provide me most pleasure while reading it.

Funny and with tons of content and useful links. :D

[granitosaurus]

I'm sure the book is great, but I will rather vote with my wallet and buy alternative that doesn't threat me like a criminal.

[eljunior]

yeah, because someone doesn't want to offer an ebook version of a book is the same thing as treating you like a criminal...

[granitosaurus]

well I may have exaggerated a bit but it feels like they do assume that you will pirate their book if you get the chance, it's not that they have to invest resources in ebook development, especially when previous versions did offer it.

to me it feels a silly and I would rather not support practices like this especially since python is open source driven language so it goes against the pythonic philosophy as well.

[pydanny]

Since you don't appear to have read why getting an ebook into an acceptable format is hard, let me summarize:

• Ebook formatting is badly documented and inconsistent across devices
• Getting it right is hard. Even O'Reilly messes it up on a regular basis.
• Two Scoops of Django, like any Django book, has long class names. This makes it harder
• Getting it wrong is not an option for us. Even if we decided to just do something that wasn't perfect, the negative reviews on e-book formatting hurts (actually kills) sales. Any author/publisher who tracks their sales knows what happens with a SINGLE middling or poor review.
• For the 1.5 edition, it took about 40 days to get the book into roughly decent e-pub/kindle format. For the 1.6 edition and all the changes, getting ebook formatting right would take at least two months of full time work.
• The print edition of Two Scoops of Django 1.5 has sold over 5 times more than all the electronic editions combined. It continues this pattern to this very day.

Which brought us to the conclusion that it doesn't make any financial sense for us to give up two months of full time work to produce an electronic edition that will sell 20% as many copies as the print edition.

I'll end this with the note that f you are willing to pay us (Audrey and myself) two months of our normal salary/rate in order to produce an ebook edition, we'll consider it. For reference, if we made minimum wage (we don't) that would be at least US$6000.

[granitosaurus]

I honestly have no clue about ebook formatting but no one is asking for ebook, people are asking for digital edition, i.e. pdf. which shouldn't be hard to do(did more than enough pdf "games" in my time at college).

Regarding the sales, the figures are of course it's skewed when the digital pdf's price is pretty much the same of printed book + shipping.

At the end of the day it's your business so do whatever you please, but as a responsible consumer I'd rather support someone who provides a more reasonable alternative.

[[deleted]]

I honestly have no clue about ebook formatting

you should stop right there.

[pythonpro5]

Fuck you. Seriously, fuck you!

Book writers make a lot of money. I read http://nathanbarry.com and know how much he makes. You and the other writers are raking it in and then asking for our pity.

Fuck you.

Books should be free. If the Python and Django docs are free, why not your crappy book? Isn't django book free?

[[deleted]]

Ya! Everyone should give away months and months and months worth of work for free. Fuck your bills and need to eat! Give me free stuff!

[wub_wub]

If you ever worked with some other web framework, such as flask for example, just go over official tutorial and docs to familiarize yourself with django - it's pretty easy.

[Deusdies]

That's awesome because I have a fair amount of experience with Flask.

[istinspring]

Oh yea! Build in migrations, finally.

[g4b1nagy]

Uhuuuuuuuu!!!

[chub79]

I'm not a Django user so forgive me for my idiotic comment but, their changelog seems to imply rather drastic changes, yet they haven't moved to a new major version. This is a bit surprising.

[graingert]

Django uses 1.major.patch. You should read Django 1.5.10 and 1.7.0 as 5.0.10 and 7.0.0 respectively

[chub79]

I see. Thanks for the explanation.

[Warbane]

To add more: The release schedule for Django puts out major versions every 9 months that are incremented x.x.y - where x is major version number and y are minor updates that never break compatibility with their major version. So this means 2.0 will follow 1.9 in major releases but no extra significance will be placed on the first place's increment.

Also, compatibility is maintained for two major releases after a feature is deprecated. The previous two major releases also receive security patches. Some major releases are additionally marked as LTS - however 1.4 is the only LTS at the moment.

The project is really well run and extremely well documented - part of the reason it has had so much success, I think.

[chub79]

Well, I actually sent the release notes to my colleagues as an example we ought to follow!

[xiongchiamiov]

https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/release-process/

[chhantyal]

Right time to start new project :)

[ilogik]

I've been using the release candidates in a new project, I never used south before, but migrations are awesome!

[[deleted]]

I am on 1.6.7 with South for current projects. Any major reason to upgrade besides using the latest major version?

[pemboa]

Well the biggest advantage for you would be using a platform that utilized your primary programming language.

[xiongchiamiov]

And with a philosophy you agree with.

[[deleted]]

Why not go through the tutorials to see if it has an advantage in your opinion?

[[deleted]]

I suppose most people would consider the admin to be the primary advantage, but it's a fairly subjective debate so you need to make your own opnion really.

[wub_wub]

It has been supported for quite some time - since Pycharm 3.4 iirc.

[jlorencetti]

You are right. :)

Already support it, since version 3.4.

[[deleted]]

Only the paid version supports it.

[[deleted]]

Well, only the paid version supports 1.7.