Fix #408: Response.age is semantically a timedelta, not a datetime #414
Conversation
| # but disregarding fractional seconds | ||
| age = age.seconds + (age.days * 24 * 3600) | ||
|
|
||
| age = int(age) |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Ping. Is there anything besides potentially the naming that's holding this back? |
|
Have a look at issue #480. @mitsuhiko seems to be quite busy so there is not much merging going on right now. I find it sad though since this prevents good features and even relatively important bug fixes to find their way into the project... |
untitaker
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8377106
to
1842d71
Compare
|
Not sure of the implications of this. I think it'd be enormouse API breakage to just include this into 0.10. |
|
The current behavior is already very broken; the Age header in the HTTP response has a completely invalid value! |
untitaker
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
16edc59
to
afc2c67
Compare
untitaker
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f9d0f4e
to
cbec4d1
Compare
|
FWIW, I've decided to delay this to 1.0, because we can cleanly break the API in that release. The patch itself seems to be fine and can be applied as-is. |
|
@untitaker can we re-schedule this to 0.13 since it's been 2 years since 1.0 was added? I think this is ok for a feature release. |
|
Sure, but technically feature releases don't allow breakage at all. But 0.13 is not a feature release (pre-1.0 different rules apply in semver)
…On 12 April 2017 17:12:03 CEST, David Lord ***@***.***> wrote:
@untitaker can we re-schedule this to 0.13 since it's been 2 years
since 1.0 was added? I think this is ok for a feature release.
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#414 (comment)
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
|
|
Ah, I didn't know we were following semver, I just figured we were ok making bigger changes in second-number releases. |
|
Pre-1.0 we would comply with semver anyway because semver allows for a lot at this stage.
…On 12 April 2017 17:14:53 CEST, David Lord ***@***.***> wrote:
Ah, I didn't know we were following semver, I just figured we were ok
making big changes in 0.x releases. I'll merge this into master then.
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#414 (comment)
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
|
|
#1104 rebases this against master so that it can be cleanly merged. |
First time I've tried to contribute to Werkzeug; criticism is welcome.
Fixes #408.