Hi All, It is time to start looking forward to the 1.9.0 release. Currently there are some 76 open PRs and they keep rolling in, which is good, but we need to decide on what is important for 1.9 and what can be put off to 1.10 because otherwise we will never finish. The datetime problems and some of the deprecations/futurewarnings that were present in 1.8 need to be dealt with. The nanmedian stuff will make a nice addition to the nan functions. Apart from those, if you have a PR or fix that you think needs to be in 1.9, please make it known. Chuck
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi All,
It is time to start looking forward to the 1.9.0 release. Currently there are some 76 open PRs and they keep rolling in, which is good,
To make the PR list a bit more manageable, I would suggest to start closing the ones which are not in a state to get merged and haven't seen activity by the author for >3 months. And add in the dev guide that this is normal policy and that authors are free to reopen the PR when they continue working on it. but we need to decide on what is important for 1.9 and what can be put off
to 1.10 because otherwise we will never finish. The datetime problems and some of the deprecations/futurewarnings that were present in 1.8 need to be dealt with. The nanmedian stuff will make a nice addition to the nan functions. Apart from those, if you have a PR or fix that you think needs to be in 1.9, please make it known.
The boolean subtract and ellipsis indexing deprecations probably need reconsidering. I get 78 test errors right now because of those if I test scipy master against numpy master. Ralf
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com>wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Charles R Harris < charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi All,
It is time to start looking forward to the 1.9.0 release. Currently there are some 76 open PRs and they keep rolling in, which is good,
To make the PR list a bit more manageable, I would suggest to start closing the ones which are not in a state to get merged and haven't seen activity by the author for >3 months. And add in the dev guide that this is normal policy and that authors are free to reopen the PR when they continue working on it.
I'd feel better about doing that if PR's were reviewed and dealt with on a regular basis, but we aren't quite there yet. That said, I'd like to keep the number down in the 30-40 range.
but we need to decide on what is important for 1.9 and what can be put off
to 1.10 because otherwise we will never finish. The datetime problems and some of the deprecations/futurewarnings that were present in 1.8 need to be dealt with. The nanmedian stuff will make a nice addition to the nan functions. Apart from those, if you have a PR or fix that you think needs to be in 1.9, please make it known.
The boolean subtract and ellipsis indexing deprecations probably need reconsidering. I get 78 test errors right now because of those if I test scipy master against numpy master.
That's a lot of errors. Do you think they should be reverted permanently or just for 1.9? Chuck
On So, 2014-03-23 at 07:26 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote: Hi All,
It is time to start looking forward to the 1.9.0 release. Currently there are some 76 open PRs and they keep rolling in, which is good,
To make the PR list a bit more manageable, I would suggest to start closing the ones which are not in a state to get merged and haven't seen activity by the author for >3 months. And add in the dev guide that this is normal policy and that authors are free to reopen the PR when they continue working on it.
I'd feel better about doing that if PR's were reviewed and dealt with on a regular basis, but we aren't quite there yet. That said, I'd like to keep the number down in the 30-40 range.
but we need to decide on what is important for 1.9 and what can be put off to 1.10 because otherwise we will never finish. The datetime problems and some of the deprecations/futurewarnings that were present in 1.8 need to be dealt with. The nanmedian stuff will make a nice addition to the nan functions. Apart from those, if you have a PR or fix that you think needs to be in 1.9, please make it known.
The boolean subtract and ellipsis indexing deprecations probably need reconsidering. I get 78 test errors right now because of those if I test scipy master against numpy master.
That's a lot of errors. Do you think they should be reverted permanently or just for 1.9?
Good question. Just to note, I don't mind reverting/removing these. I was somewhat aware that the double ellipsis caused a lot scipy failures, but they seemed mostly in the tests with code like `arr[..., ...]` and I didn't check if it might be more trouble then gain. - Sebastian
Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Sebastian Berg <sebastian@sipsolutions.net>wrote:
On So, 2014-03-23 at 07:26 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote: Hi All,
It is time to start looking forward to the 1.9.0 release. Currently there are some 76 open PRs and they keep rolling in, which is good,
To make the PR list a bit more manageable, I would suggest to start closing the ones which are not in a state to get merged and haven't seen activity by the author for >3 months. And add in the dev guide that this is normal policy and that authors are free to reopen the PR when they continue working on it.
I'd feel better about doing that if PR's were reviewed and dealt with on a regular basis, but we aren't quite there yet. That said, I'd like to keep the number down in the 30-40 range.
but we need to decide on what is important for 1.9 and what can be put off to 1.10 because otherwise we will never finish. The datetime problems and some of the deprecations/futurewarnings that were present in 1.8 need to be dealt with. The nanmedian stuff will make a nice addition to the nan functions. Apart from those, if you have a PR or fix that you think needs to be in 1.9, please make it known.
The boolean subtract and ellipsis indexing deprecations probably need reconsidering. I get 78 test errors right now because of those if I test scipy master against numpy master.
That's a lot of errors. Do you think they should be reverted permanently or just for 1.9?
Temporarily probably. Assuming they were a good idea to start with.
Good question. Just to note, I don't mind reverting/removing these. I was somewhat aware that the double ellipsis caused a lot scipy failures, but they seemed mostly in the tests with code like `arr[..., ...]` and I didn't check if it might be more trouble then gain.
IIRC we had something like this before with the safe casting changes in 1.6.x. We could do the following: 1. fix the issues seen in scipy (and scikits etc.) now. 2. revert this change for 1.9.x so it doesn't cause issues with released versions. 3. re-introduce the deprecations in a year or so. In a year scipy will have 2 released versions with the fixes from (1). Ralf
participants (3)
-
Charles R Harris -
Ralf Gommers -
Sebastian Berg