<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div><br></div><div>Are we still planning on an early April release for v0.19? Could we start marking "blockers"?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Andreas Mueller <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:t3kcit@gmail.com" target="_blank">t3kcit@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><span>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="m_8494949919036217297m_-2181011390712339093moz-cite-prefix">On 02/07/2017 09:00 PM, Joel Nothman
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">On 12 January 2017 at 08:51, Gael
            Varoquaux <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gael.varoquaux@normalesup.org" target="_blank">gael.varoquaux@normalesup.org</a><wbr>></span>
            wrote:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 08:41:51AM +1100, Joel
                Nothman wrote:<br>
                > When the two versions deprecation policy was
                instituted, releases were much<br>
                > more frequent... Is that enough of an excuse?<br>
                <br>
              </span>I'd rather say that we can here decide that we are
              giving a longer grace<br>
              period.<br>
              <br>
              I think that slow deprecations are a good things (see
              titus's blog post<br>
              here: <a href="http://ivory.idyll.org/blog/2017-pof-software-archivability.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://ivory.idyll.org/blog/20<wbr>17-pof-software-archivability.<wbr>html</a>
              )<br>
            </blockquote>
            <div> </div>
            <div>Given that 0.18 was a very slow release, and the work
              for removing deprecated material from 0.19 has already
              been done, I don't think we should revert that. I agree
              that we can delay the deprecation deadline for 0.20 and
              0.21.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>In terms of release schedule, are we aiming for RC in
              early-mid March, assuming Andy's above prognostications
              are correct and he is able to review in a bigger way in a
              week or so?</div>
            <br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote></span>
    Sometimes I wonder how Amazon ever gave me a job in forecasting....<br>
    Spring break is March 13-17th ;)<br>
  </div>

<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
scikit-learn mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:scikit-learn@python.org" target="_blank">scikit-learn@python.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.python.org/mailma<wbr>n/listinfo/scikit-learn</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_8494949919036217297gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small">Raghav RV</div><div style="font-size:small"><a href="https://github.com/raghavrv" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank">https://github.com/raghavrv</a></div><div><br></div></div></div>
</div></div>