3 ms·

I'm happy to see that people are using the LTS release as intended. Not surprised at all that the newest releases are the least used ones. More than a little su

I'm happy to see that people are using the LTS release as intended. Not surprised at all that the newest releases are the least used ones. More than a little surprised that version 1.6 still has any users at all, let alone how many it actually does have. For those not familiar with django's release history the 1.6 -> 1.7 major release was a very large change in terms of how database migrations are handled. In 1.6 (and earlier) there was no built in too for it, but a very popular django extension library called South was the standard. In version 1.7 the creator of South (Andrew Godwin) wrote a migration tool for django core that was based on his previous work with South. There is a migration path from South to django core migrations and it's not that scary to do but it's a little work. That was several years ago at this point though. I wonder if some projects just abandoned upgrading at 1.6 because of this.

ubernostrum 9y ago
Any piece of software that doesn't essentially force an upgrade on you will end up used in a lot of deployments that never upgrade. Not much we can do about that. Though you're right that people tend to "stick" on a version where the next step up is a trickier upgrade. That's happened a couple times in Django's history -- a lot of early deployments (pre-1.0) pinned for a long time on 0.91 since the Django ORM got completely rewritten for 0.95. And post-1.0, the switch to class-based generic views also left some people behind. 1.11 is likely to be "sticky" too since it's the last version that will support Python 2 (the next release -- Django 2.0 -- will be Python-3-only, and 1.11's LTS support cycle is timed to expire when upstream support for Python 2.7 does).