search

timonweb / django-tailwind

Django + Tailwind CSS = 💚
https://django-tailwind.readthedocs.io
MIT License
1.46k stars 92 forks source link

django-tailwind depends on Django<3.2 #50

Closed thelittlebug closed 3 years ago

timonweb commented 3 years ago

there's still time before April, but yeah, will leave this as a reminder.

justinmayer commented 3 years ago

After having had some unpleasant experiences with the unintended consequences of placing upper bounds on dependent package versions, I have come to wonder whether doing so carries costs that outweigh the benefits.

Quite coincidentally, my friend Hynek just published an article two days ago that (among other things) underscores those costs. To wit:

If you maintain a public package and pin the major version of a dependency of yours, you transitively do this to the applications of your users.

[…]

Don’t ever pin major versions, unless you know they’re broken.

In short, what would be the downsides to removing the upper bound, and are those downsides all that serious? i.e.:

django = ">=2.2"
thelittlebug commented 3 years ago

my simple rule would be this: is it a package used by others? loose bounds is it a production deployment? try to be as explicit as possible

if you take a look on other projects like https://github.com/encode/django-rest-framework you can see that they are not limiting as much.

timonweb commented 3 years ago

Yeah, I think loosening version requirements won't be a bad idea. If it breaks on the new version, then someone would report it or PR it.

thelittlebug commented 3 years ago

ah! and thanks for your nice project :)

timonweb commented 3 years ago

Released django-tailwind 1.1.2 that doesn't have the upper bound for Django version.