Django: what’s new in 6.0

Posted by rbanffy 10 hours ago

Counter230Comment53OpenOriginal

Comments

Comment by teagee 9 hours ago

Any code or blog written by Adam is worth spending some time on.

It will be interesting to see how the tasks framework develops and expands. I am sad to see the great Django-Q2 lumped in with the awful Celery though.

Comment by adamchainz 7 hours ago

OP here, thanks for the praise!

Yeah, I mentioned Celery due to its popularity, no other reason ;)

Comment by ryanisnan 7 hours ago

You are a great writer - thanks for putting this together!

Comment by blorenz 6 hours ago

I’m currently stuck with the tech debt of Celery myself. I understand that! Does Django Tasks support async functions?

Comment by hintoftime 8 hours ago

Why is celery awful?

Comment by leobuskin 5 hours ago

It's okay till it's not. Everyone I know who had Celery in production was looking for a substitution (custom or third-party) on a regular basis. Too many moving pieces and nuances (config × logic × backend), too many unresolved problems deep in its core (we've seen some ghosts you can't debug), too much of a codebase to understand or hack. At some point we were able to stabilize it (a bunch of magic tricks and patches) and froze every related piece; it worked well under pressure (thanks, RabbitMQ).

Comment by akoumjian 5 hours ago

Celery is great and awful at the same time. In particular, because it is many Python folks' first introduction to distributed task processing and all the things that can go wrong with it. Not to mention, debugging can be a nightmare. Some examples:

- your function arguments aren't serializable - your side effects (e.g. database writes) aren't idempotent - discovering what backpressure is and that you need it - losing queued tasks during deployment / non-compatible code changes

There's also some stuff particular to celery's runtime model that makes it incredibly prone to memory leaks and other fun stuff.

Honestly, it's a great education.

Comment by ffsm8 3 hours ago

> your side effects (e.g. database writes) aren't idempotent

What does idempotent mean in this context, or did you mean atomic/rollback on error?

I'm confused because how could a database write be idempotent in Django? Maybe if it introduced a version on each entity and used that for crdt on writes? But that'd be a significant performance impact, as it couldn't just be a single write anymore, instead they'd have to do it via multiple round trips

Comment by saaspirant 4 hours ago

From your experience, what is a better alternative guys?

Comment by leobuskin 3 hours ago

There’s no alternative (while prototyping), and anything else is better (when you properly defined your case).

Comment by tclancy 6 hours ago

Because it’s a seducer. It does what you need to do and you two are happy together. So you shower more tasks on Celery and it becomes cold and non-responsive at random times.

And debugging is a pain in the ass. Most places I’ve been that have it, I’ve tried to sell them on adding Flower to give better insight and everyone thinks that’s a very good idea but there isn’t time because we need to debug these inscrutable Celery issues.

https://flower.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

Comment by gnatman 7 hours ago

Computer, load up Celery Man please.

Comment by jonatron 8 hours ago

I'm of the opinion that django task apps should only support a single backend. For example, django-rq for redis only. There's too many differences in backends to make a good app that can handle multiple. That said, I've only used celery in production before, and I'm willing to change my mind.

Comment by themerone 1 hour ago

With that logic, the Django orm should only support one database.

Comment by giancarlostoro 10 hours ago

Template partials look good, which is one of the key reasons frameworks like React are as good and popular as they are, because you can reuse small segments of code.

Comment by apothegm 6 hours ago

The most obvious value here is for HTMX, which requires a lot of partial templates.

Comment by littlecranky67 8 hours ago

Key benefit for reusability and composability in React is IMHO that they don't use templates at all, but everything is a function.

Comment by globular-toast 22 minutes ago

Exactly. There are a few libraries to achieve a similar thing in Python:

* https://htpy.dev/

* https://pypi.org/project/fast_html/

* https://fastht.ml/ (different to above, I think)

* https://github.com/volfpeter/fasthx

Probably others. I strongly prefer this to templating, but I find it makes dyed in the wool Django people squirm.

Comment by squidsoup 9 hours ago

React allows for encapsulation of state in a reusable component, its more than just templating.

Comment by simonw 9 hours ago

They're a neat design. I started using them on my blog the other day as part of trying out Django 6: https://github.com/simonw/simonwillisonblog/blob/faec3532183...

Comment by pier25 4 hours ago

Amazing that Django didn't have this until 2025

Comment by chistev 9 hours ago

But you could already reuse templates in Django by including them. What am I missing?

Comment by teagee 9 hours ago

Check out the HTMX example in the blog, this helped me better understand how it could be used

https://adamj.eu/tech/2025/12/03/django-whats-new-6.0/#rende...

Comment by The_Fox 8 hours ago

I'm an avid HTMX user but never did I ever think "I'm using so many includes, I wish I didn't have to use include so much."

What I would like is a way to cut down the sprawl of urls and views.

Comment by adparadox 8 hours ago

I do a check for `request.htmx` in my views and conditionally return a template partial as needed. This reduced my need for one-off view functions that were only returning partials for htmx. Works pretty well from my experience.

Comment by JodieBenitez 1 hour ago

It's just syntactic sugar, making life a bit easier for HTMX users (cf. "htmx was the main motivation for this feature").

I'm using Unpoly and I just render the whole page and let Unpoly swap the content according to the target selectors, so no need for this. Not much difference in perf if you dont generate gigantic pages with heavy header/footer.

Comment by WD-42 7 hours ago

Partialdef inline is the real win. Lets you define parts of a page without needing to place them in another file. Reduces the mental overhead of imagining how the inclusion will look because it’s already there.

The use case is mainly driven by htmx where you will have lots of these partials and the view code renders them as individual responses.

Comment by agumonkey 9 hours ago

indeed the vintage templating was a logical bottleneck

Comment by f311a 9 hours ago

How is it different from include? Just less files from my perspective

Comment by simonw 9 hours ago

The "inline partials" feature is neat, means you can use and define a partial at the same time.

The way you can render just a named partial from both the render() shortcut and the include tag is nice too:

https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/6.0/ref/templates/language...

Comment by f311a 9 hours ago

Yeah, but I was doing the same thing 10 years ago with include mixed with extends and blocks. I can just include a file inside a template or render it directly.

Comment by agumonkey 2 hours ago

you're kinda right, {% partial ... %} vs {% include ... %} is not a big difference, but my mind was vaguely thinking that "includes" have often been seen as large templates, whereas partial have been after the component era with the idea of making small blocks. (my 2 cents)

Comment by chistev 9 hours ago

I asked the same question

Comment by wahnfrieden 6 hours ago

There've been a variety of open source attempts at this idea. Is this official one now the best to use, or are the others still compelling?

Comment by JodieBenitez 1 hour ago

https://django-cotton.com/ is component-based. I used it a bit, it's nice if you're used to the ways of front-end frameworks, I guess.

Comment by wahnfrieden 1 hour ago

Comment by JodieBenitez 1 hour ago

While using Cotton my thoughts were "ok, it's kinda cool... but do I really need it ? No. Is it worth the extra dependency ? No."

There is something very appeasing in just pulling Django and have all the basics covered. It's nice to have options when needed though.

Comment by viiralvx 1 hour ago

Template Partials and HTMX seems like the Django equivalent of View Components and Stimulus for Rails, which is nice.

Also, good to see first class support for Tasks, among a lot of other niceties!

Comment by ChrisArchitect 9 hours ago

Comment by jasoncartwright 9 hours ago

[flagged]

Comment by nine_k 8 hours ago

Well, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonce_word

It makes me sad when a secondary meaning, which does not even overcome the main meaning in usage, becomes an obstacle for the normal use of a word. It's like seeing a rainbow as a sexualized symbol not fit for children, because it also happens to be used by LGBTQ+ community. (BTW, since you're a Brit: did people stop using the word "fag" to refer to a cigarette?)

Comment by bigstrat2003 8 hours ago

I mean, it is sad. But unfortunately that is what happened with "master", "slave", "whitelist", and "blacklist". No reasonable person construed these as offensive or having any implications about the wider world. But there are people in our profession who are determined to take offense where none is given, and unfortunately they got their way.

Comment by nine_k 5 hours ago

More to your point, yes, taking offense can be turned into a weapon: https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/08/intolerant-wins-dictatorship...

Comment by nine_k 7 hours ago

Well, "slave" has a pretty direct main meaning of an oppressed person doing forced labor. The word "master" is much milder in this regard (compare "master's degree" and "slave's degree"). The word "nonce" in normal usage seems even more removed from any pejorative secondary meanings.

Comment by tomhow 8 hours ago

We don't need to bring this kind of thing up. We're not school children and most of us are technology professionals, so the meaning is clear.

These guidelines are relevant here:

Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead.

Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. ... name collisions ... . They're too common to be interesting.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Comment by tdfirth 9 hours ago

American hegemony, and all that.

Comment by firecall 8 hours ago

In the US they spell it as nonze.

Comment by lagniappe 8 hours ago

No we don't.

Comment by nophunphil 8 hours ago

Pretty positive that was a joke/bait…

Comment by firecall 5 hours ago

It absolutely was a joke

Slightly absurdist non-sensical humour I’ll admit, but none the less, a joke :-)

Comment by diath 8 hours ago

Comment by harshreality 8 hours ago

That didn't stop people from throwing a fit over master-slave terminology in software (having nothing to do with slavery), going so far as to rename long-standing development branch names, as well as put significant effort into removing such terms from the code itself and any documentation.