Added features described in Django 2.2 docs

[JordanReiter]

As far as I can tell these are all the features needed for Django 2.2 compatibility. I think technically SQL Server could support partial indexes but for now it can just be unsupported.

[morlandi]

Many thanks @JordanReiter
Works as expected ... +1 to merge into main branch

[JordanReiter]

@morlandi no problem! I do think it means that some functionality that could potentially be supported is missing, but at the very least it works and provides similar functionality that was present in version 2.1.

[morlandi]

at the very least it works and provides similar functionality that was present in version 2.1.

True

I just wonder: isn't the package too restrictive in raising an exception when the actual Django version is ABOVE the expected one ? In my opinion, a warning would be more appropriate.

I just migrated to Django 2.2 a reasonably complex project requiring 60 external Python modules / apps. In doing so, I took the responsibility to supervise the process and check all unit tests.
All in all, that wasn't too bad.
And guess what ? ... the only nuisance was related to django-pyodbc-azure and it's restrictive setup constraints. Would all other involved Django apps be so restrictive, I couldn't have possibly dealt with this migration at all.

[JordanReiter]

Database behavior is so integral that I think it's reasonable to have strict restrictions for this library. I agree it would be overkill for other libraries/packages.

…

On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 8:39 PM morlandi ***@***.***> wrote: at the very least it works and provides similar functionality that was present in version 2.1. True I just wonder: isn't the package too restrictive in raising an exception when the actual Django version is ABOVE the expected one ? In my opinion, a warning would be more appropriate. I just migrated to Django 2.2 a reasonably complex project requiring 60 external Python modules / apps. In doing so, I took the responsability to supervise the process and check all unit tests. All in all, that whasn't bad at all. And guess what ? ... the only nuisance was realated to django-pyodbc-azure and it's restrictive setup constraints. Would all other involved Django apps be so restrictive, I couldn't have possibly dealt with this migration at all. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#204 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABX4TXDZC4GGKQJ5JFYOO3PSJFLDANCNFSM4HE7KQOA> .

-- Jordan Reiter [email protected]

[morlandi]

Hmmm ... I totally agree on the "better safe than sorry" approach ;)

On the other side, If you compare the file changes between subsequent versions of the package, you'll mainly find extensions and optimisations, more than fixes for incompatibility issues.
That is probably because the Django ORM is consolidated enough to require very infrequent backward-incompatible changes in this area.

While I'm at it, let me thank you again for contribution, and a big big thank to @michiya for his remarkable commitment

[peterfarrell]

We are using the code in the PR and it works as expected. +1 on getting this merged in ASAP.

[Crocmagnon]

What is the status of this PR ? Django 2.0 has been out since 3 months now, this lib is the only one forcing us to stay on 2.1 😕

[Crocmagnon]

Just for the record, there will be no Django 2.3. The next release is 3.0 😊
See : https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/release-process/ and https://www.djangoproject.com/download/

[twisbrogan]

Working as expected here. All for getting in merged in.

[frafra]

README.md should be updated too ;-) Thank you for your efforts!

[GlamTam]

Works as expected ... +1 to merge into main branch

[kummerer94]

Works for us, too.

[sgupta227]

Please merge it to master.

[JordanReiter]

Please merge it to master.

Would if I could buddy.

[daybarr]

For those asking for this PR to be merged, it looks like @michiya has had to move on after giving much hard work on this project. We thank him for his efforts and outstanding contribution over the years.

For the future, @FlipperPA has kicked off a project to incorporate this work into the core of the Django project itself

• A comment on this project announcing that
• @FlipperPA's branch of django where the MSSQL backend was added

While that work continues, the 2019-12-04 update from FlipperPA endorses the https://github.com/ESSolutions/django-mssql-backend fork of this repo:

We are still waiting for a reply from Microsoft. They're a large company, so understandably, it takes a little while.

For now, if people need to get onto Django 2.2 for long term support (which will last until April, 2022), you can use this package:

https://github.com/ESSolutions/django-mssql-backend

If Microsoft and/or the Django Software Foundation end up wanting to bring support for SQL Server into core, the django-mssql-backend repository is a possible starting point, IMHO.

https://github.com/ESSolutions/django-mssql-backend has merged Django 2.2 compatibility into master, as well as various other fixes. @OskarPersson is working hard on Django 3 support too (ESSolutions#18). We should probably all switch to using django-mssql-backend, instead of django-pyodbc-azure, and thank @OskarPersson for picking up the baton that @michiya ran with for so long.

[wdifruscio]

HI everyone! This looks awesome and I am ready to try it out :D, however I am wondering has anyone tried django 3.0 yet? I am kicking off a new service soon and would love to use the newest version but I am a little concerned about the connection to mssql - thoughts? Is anything radically different in 3.0?

[OskarPersson]

@wdifruscio See ESSolutions#19