requirements/runtime.txt: Django>=2.2,<6.0 #792
Conversation
Fixes #755 We agree to have a full test run before progressing to the next major versions of Django. * #703 is an example of the kind of crash bugs that can be introduced in Django's major version upgrades. * #755 describes why we should have confidence in Django minor and micro version upgrades. Let's work together to add new versions of Django to our GitHub Actions as they are released to provide our users with safe upgrade paths.
| @@ -1 +1 @@ | |||
| Django>=2.2,<5.2 | |||
| Django>=2.2,<6.0 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Django>=2.2,<6.0 | |
| Django>=2.2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We do not want another
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We do not want another
@cclauss you're referencing a breaking change of major version , but <6.0 allows minor bump, which is usually safe.
I can't imagine django breaking changes in minor version within 5.x branch
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@cclauss ^^ This problem could have been fixed by the end user with the use of monkey patching. User had a choice.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ivan-klass Please re-read the full commit message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ivan-klass Please re-read the full commit message.
Ahh, right! Sorry, I was lost in the discussion. I was looking forward for 5.2 compatible release, but don't want to block in case 5.3 and 5.4 next time. I'm not that experience for a strict opinion here, I would refer to best practices - i.e. how well-known django-based libraries do.
Fixes #755
We agree to have a full test run before upgrading to each new major version of Django.
Let's work collaboratively to add new versions of Django to our GitHub Actions as they are released to provide our users with safe upgrades.