django_1_5: remove #20195

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 23, 2016

Projects

None yet

4 participants

@cko
Contributor
cko commented Nov 5, 2016
Motivation for this change

Django 1.5 is no longer developed and should therefor be removed (see: https://www.djangoproject.com/download/)

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing
    (nix.useSandbox on NixOS,
    or option build-use-sandbox in nix.conf
    on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • Linux
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@FRidh
Member
FRidh commented Nov 5, 2016

cc @lsix

@fpletz
Member
fpletz commented Nov 8, 2016

As this version of Django has security vulnerabilities and is not maintained by upstream anymore it should also be removed from 16.09.

@lsix
Contributor
lsix commented Nov 8, 2016

Hi (sorry for late reply).

At first sight, it looks good to me. Dropping django-1.5 would be nice. Maybe each individual updates can be separated into individual commits. I’ll review that PR properly ASAP (I have very limited access to my computer those days).

@lsix

Hi, thanks for the PR.

Could it be possible to:

  • explicitly keep django as a [propagated] build input of graphite_web,
  • separate the work in one commit for each affected derivation?

With that, it will be OK for me.

pkgs/top-level/python-packages.nix
};
- propagatedBuildInputs = with self; [ django_1_5 django_tagging whisper pycairo ldap memcached ];
+ propagatedBuildInputs = with self; [ django_tagging whisper pycairo ldap memcached ];
@lsix
lsix Nov 14, 2016 Contributor

Even if django_tagging has django as a propagated build input, django should be listed as direct build dependency of graphite_web.

@cko
Contributor
cko commented Nov 14, 2016

[x] done

@lsix lsix merged commit 00cecf6 into NixOS:master Nov 23, 2016

1 check failed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build could not complete due to an error
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment