[Numpy-discussion] Introduction to Scott, Jason, and (possibly) others from Enthought

[Charles R Harris]

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 4:54 AM, Ralf Gommers
<ralf.gommers at googlemail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Ralf Gommers <
>> ralf.gommers at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:06 AM, Charles R Harris <
>>> charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey, I thought that was your job ;) Maybe the best thing is to start by
>>>>> making a branch for the removal and we can argue about who gets the short
>>>>> end of the stick later...
>>>>>
>>>>> Manage the release yes, do the heavy lifting not necessarily:) OK, I'll
>>> make the branch tonight.
>>>
>>> If the removal just involves the same changes that were made for 1.4.1
>>> then I can do it. But I'm not familiar with this code and if it's more work,
>>> I probably won't have time for it between the scipy 0.8.0 release and my
>>> 'real job', like you call it.
>>>
>>>
>> I think it may be a bit trickier because Travis made more changes. I think
>> the relevant commits are r8113..r8115 and 8107..8108. After removing those
>> we still need to remove the same stuff as we did for the 1.4.1 release. We
>> will need some way of testing if the removal was successful.
>>
>
> That still looks like it's not an insane amount of work.
>
> We probably want to make sure there is a documentation update also, maybe
>> before making the branch.
>>
>> I checked and there's not too much to merge, most of the changes (
> http://docs.scipy.org/numpy/patch/) don't apply cleanly or at all. The
> latter because they're docs for constants, lists, etc.
>
> The biggest chuck of recent changes is for the polynomial and chebyshev
> docs, can you give your opinion on those Charles? The OK to Apply is set to
> True for all of them, but I'm not sure who did that.


I'll go have a look. David (G) worked with me off-line so I expect they are
generally OK. The markup seems a bit excessive to me, but that is probably a
tradeoff between the appearance of the generated docs and the terminal help.
I don't know what is standard practice there these days.


> The patch generation won't work for many of those docs, so if you could
> check if any docs should be merged manually right now that would be useful.
>
>
The {Chebyshev, Polynomial} documentation that has conflicts can't be edited
on the web, as they reference documents generated from a template at module
load time. I'll fix that at some point, but at the moment it is easier to
maintain one template than to maintain two separate versions. I'll hand
merge anything there that looks appropriate.

@ David G: there are some conflicts in docs you recently edited,
> http://docs.scipy.org/numpy/merge/. Would you mind resolving those?
>
>
Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100531/8be6f1f0/attachment.html>