"This alpha milestone marks a complete feature freeze."
"The current release schedule calls for a beta release in about a month and a release candidate about a month from then."
"The Django 1.11.x series is the last to support Python 2.7."
Then start writing your own application. When you have questions read the django documentantion. The django docs are the best documentantion I've ever seen, they are better than most books about django and should answer all your questions. The docs are so good I recommend reading them from start to finish - i.e download this off line version of the docs: https://media.readthedocs.org/pdf/django/1.11.x/django.pdf
and read it from cover to cover. You will not regret it.
Would you also recommend learning CSS, HTTP, PHP _before_ the Django tutorials?
It covers HTML, CSS, git, etc. in addition to teaching you Django.
Coming from VFX will give you a different perspective compared to other compsci types IMO. Especially if you've worked with things procedurally.
In the end with Django it's more than just Python but other than controlling ornery ORM generated SQL its pretty easy to work with on all fronts and has PHENOMENAL documentation.
Hit me up I twitter @leetrout if you want to chat more.
These things are what I am scared of.
> Django 2.0 supports Python 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6. We highly recommend and only officially support the latest release of each series.
People should not write new code in Python 2 at all. If you're learning Python today, I'd say pretend Python 2 doesn't exist. Use python3-venv and renounce the baggage of the past.
I have not even seen mention of moving to 3.
I don't work with a studio yet but studios who buy the software don't seem too worried for some reason, even though their pipelines depend on it. Maybe someone else can offer better insight. As someone wanting to go into pipeline development, I am very curious.
Support exists at least since August 2016: https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2016/08/python-3-on-Goo...
The new path based URLs look great - to me, the gain looks like readability more than anything (reading regexps at a glance isn't exactly easy, especially if they have named groups), and having built in type coercion for the parameters is a nice win too.
In a way that actually sounds like a good way to release things.
* Release 1.11 LTS with final feature updates for people who want to stay on Python2.7,
* Release 2.0 which is mostly a refactoring & internal cleanup - so for Django users on Python3 it should be a simple upgrade, and you get real life testing on it,
* Start adding features once the refactoring seems stable.
And your shop still runs on Py2k, you'll need to move to Py3k to use Django 2.0. This also means that websockets support will not land on Django version that works for Py2k.
EDIT: I am without actual internet or mobile tethering and an unable to `git clone https://github.com/django/django -b stable/2.0.x` and check out this convenient new feature.
- Dropped support for Python 2
- New simpler syntax for specifying URL routes (as an alternative to the traditional regex-based one, which is still supported)
- The admin interface got a new responsive design that works better on mobile
- The ORM now has first-class support for OVER clauses
This isn't a huge change the world release which you might expect of a 2.0.
The biggest one seems to be dropping Python 2.x support.
This is probably the reason for the 2.0.
Django 1.11 is a LTS (Long Term Support) release so it will have security upgrades until 2020, so you are safe sticking with it.
However I'd go ahead with 1.11 and transition to 2.0 to learn how Django handles deprecation and how to upgrade a codebase, both very useful skills as Django has a steady release process and it's often easier to track Django than to do a multi-version migration.
Web framework these days are irrelevant IMHO. There are no land-sliding advantages between frameworks.
Pick up what you most familiar with, get job done ASAP.
My recommendation these days goes like this: If you are more familiar or prefer Python use Django. If Ruby is your thing, go with rails.
Of course this rule has its own exceptions.
Like strong typing (Haskell), or actor model (Erlang/Elixir), or extreme speed/efficiency (compiled languages), or a "better JS" (Elm/PureScript/ReasomML).
> get job done ASAP.
But having maintainable/hackable/refactorable code is really nice too! IMHO, nowadays PhpWithFrameworkOfChoice+jQuery is not a very defendable choice for a greenfield "SPA".
Here's a nice grid of all these packages: https://djangopackages.org/
And a list of packages I use on (almost) all my projects:
* django-rest-framework (if REST API is needed)
I always wanted to write a blog post about these packages but never have been able to find the time :/
Grab a small project(like a todo list), modify it and try to enhance it. I guarantee you will learn more from this than a thousand tutorials.
Author uses recent version of Python and Django and is building with You something useful.
1) don't-- instead learn about making single page apps on the front end using React and Redux, or perhaps Angular 2. Then write a REST backend in either Node, Go, Python, or C#. Or go serverless and write the backend in Firebase.
2) if you really do want to do Django, start by doing the default tutorial that focuses on building something in the admin interface. Coming from a rails background you are on somewhat similar ground.
For example, in my industry (I work on the public sector) SPAs are never needed. Good old traditional request/response web apps, maybe with a little jquery on top to make things more responsive or add some advanced controls (autocompletes, keywords etc) are perfect for the job.
An experienced django developer can create a full traditional multi-user CRUD web app in a couple of hours. You'll just create the models and a couple of CBVs and everything else will be auto-created (but not magically created) through django-forms, django-filters and django-tables2. Now, how much time would you need to duplicate this functionality with an SPA? As I said, if you have money to burn then this is the way to go - on other cases, just use Django.
Actually it's very easy to put together a single page application today! Really easy, really fast, really practical. I'll lay out the basic steps below. But before that, an important note: several years ago, what you said was totally true. In, say, 2013, it would have been a big piles-of-cash-burning exercise to make a single page application. Today, though, it's actually quite simple, fast, and productive to create and deploy a single page application. Here are the basic steps, assuming you're using Angular 2 for example.
1) Generate your application. This is a single command line command.
2) Edit it a little, add a text box and some buttons.
3) Deploy it to google app engine; this is a single command line command, too.
The time investment is in learning how to write apps with Angular 2 or React. That is indeed a big learning curve, but it's way easier today than it was years ago. Angular 2 is way easier to write apps in than Angular 1 was. Deployment is easier than it once was.
My real thesis here is that today is a good day to embrace the modern web and try things a new way-- single page apps are actually much more straightforward and practical than they were years ago.
I totally agree that if your goal is to build a crud app for a client then Django is likely a superior approach. But if you're already a Rails developer that wants to learn something new, then SPA is a better investment of time than Django.
That will create a toy application. If you want to create a production application you need to handle data. To handle data you will need:
* Tables / lists to display the data
* Views to edit and display the data
* Forms to edit the data
* Auditing of the user actions
* User authentication + authorization
All these are not trivial to create in an SPA especially since you'll always need both server and client side code. With django (or rails, or spring or various other server only frameworks) you won't need to write client code and most of these components will be auto-generated (at leas their default values).
For your last comment, I also agree that if you know rails then you don't really need to learn django since they are both similar (however I do profer django because of its no magic philisophy and because python is a better language than ruby) but I believe that you also don't need to go the SPA route until somebody specifically asks for an SPA and has good reasons asking for it (or you want to learn the technology and modern frameworks that surround SPAs).
As a final comment, I have to say that really like all those modern frameworks (especiall react and redux) but I won't consider them for my day-to-day job since instead of creating something in 1 week I'd need 1 month using these technologies.
My favorite example is the bloatware that is Asana. I would be 10x happier if it was a using simple components written in JS but not the whole app hiding inside of a bloated SPA.
If the goal is to learn Django, then the basic tutorial is a great place to start, especially for a Rails engineer. If the goal is to build something from scratch in 2017, Django is probably not good choice for someone that's already a Rails expert.
Django would be a great way to set up an admin interface and rapidly get a CRUD interface going for an app of 20+ inter-related tables going. But the OP is already a Rails engineer, and in the modern world they're not going to be gaining much. Django is indeed a nice way to make REST backends, but so is Rails.
If the idea is to learn something new for an existing Rails engineer, then single page apps are a good choice or some other way to make backends (such as Flask) would be a superior investment of time.
With that said you may find many 3rd party apps / utils lagging. A couple libs I use still don't support new style middleware, for instance.
With 2.0 dropping support for py2.7 this might cause more pain points for poorly maintained libs but all in all keeping up with Django releases is pretty straightforward and almost always worth it.
Source: happily using Django since 2008.
We always end up with a bunch of third party libraries, though, and those end up being upgrade blockers.
A notable example recently was django-tastypie, which didn't cut a Django 1.10-compatible release for 11 months after it came out -- four months after Django 1.9 lost security support. So part of our Django 1.10 upgrade was moving to another REST framework.
(If you don't want that kind of churn, sticking to LTS would make sense - I think 1.8 still has support.)