On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
Can we defer the Scipy build until after the Numpy build?
That doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I must say I'm a little confused as to how we're going to make the decisions here.
How about: attempt to reach consensus? David's concern on DLLs hasn't been addressed yet, nor has mine on packages being unavailable. I was actually still answering another of your emails, but I can't seem to reply fast enough.
Yep, we will need to address those.
I'm sure you agree that there's an opposite argument to be made, and I would make it if I thought it would make a difference, but I'm losing faith in my ability to keep the discussion on track, and I don't know what to do about that.
I don't see the problem. Before you offered to put in work. Ondrej is willing to help, so is Christoph. So why is it impossible to do Scipy builds?
I can see us getting to a solution here, but offering Numpy installers without Scipy ones is not a solution in my book.
Exactly. There is no problem here. Fortran needs to be working as a first class citizen. I personally use modern Fortran a lot. I've setup this page: http://fortran90.org/ with a relevant FAQ about binary compatibility: http://fortran90.org/src/faq.html#are-fortran-compilers-abi-compatible and based on how things work on Windows, I'll be happy to extend the information there. Ondrej