Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Iso8601 format #9

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 1, 2012
Merged

Iso8601 format #9

merged 4 commits into from
Aug 1, 2012

Conversation

ericmoritz
Copy link
Collaborator

This makes ISO8601 the default for DateTimeField, DateField and TimeField.

This is backwards compatible with version 0.5.0 because format was an required argument for date based fields.

ericmoritz added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 1, 2012
@ericmoritz ericmoritz merged commit de37d48 into master Aug 1, 2012
@JNRowe
Copy link
Contributor

JNRowe commented Aug 1, 2012

Would you consider making this default to importing the system version of pyso8601 if it is available? I realise bundling packages makes life easier in some setups, but I know I'm going to hit a massive brick wall if I ask our admins to roll out micromodels updates that include bundled libraries.

@ericmoritz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I can. I am just curious to why there would be an objection if the bundled package is namespaced at micromodels.packages. This is what the requests package does.

@JNRowe
Copy link
Contributor

JNRowe commented Aug 2, 2012

I am just curious to why there would be an objection if the bundled package is namespaced at micromodels.packages.

It means taking on the maintenance burden for a chunk of code twice(or more if it happened elsewhere too).

The funny thing is I looked at it entirely the other way, I can't understand why it would be bundled in the first place. Of course, that is your call but I just wanted to ask.


The longer version...

Fedora helpfully have a really nice document about this and the Debian folks have a short policy note explaining the reasons to avoid bundling.

This is what the requests package does.

Oddly, you seem to have picked an example that I would probably have used as a counter argument ;)

The requests package gets special treatment in debian for its urllib3 bundling, see the changelog or the packaging tarball for details.

Debian also pull the six bundling out. Having just looked at the repo a new heap of libraries have been recently bundled, which one would expect means more patches to pile up soon.

@ericmoritz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

My motivation for bundling it is that I didn't want to force a certain version on people. I also felt like adding a new system dependency is a backwards-incompatible change that I didn't want to make for a minor version update.

By namespacing it under micromodels.packages, someone can install any version of PySO8601 and import that version using:

 import PySO8601

The two versions can live together within one python environment without conflict.

That being said, I am not married to the requests style bundling and can be swayed away from it.

@ericmoritz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ok, I see the benefit to non-bundling and I agree. I am going to create a 0.6.0 version that does not bundle PySO8601.

@JNRowe
Copy link
Contributor

JNRowe commented Aug 2, 2012

Excellent! And, thanks for looking in to this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants