[Numpy-discussion] Schedule for 1.5.1?

[Ralf Gommers]

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Charles R Harris
<charlesr.harris at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:34 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Charles R Harris <
>> charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Pauli Virtanen <pav at iki.fi> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Should we set a date for a bugfix 1.5.1 release? There are some bugs
>>>> that
>>>> would be nice to sort out in the 1.5.x series:
>>>>
>>>> Any Python versions:
>>>>
>>>> - #1605 (Cython vs. PEP-3118 issue: raising exceptions with active
>>>>         cython buffers caused undefined behavior. Breaks Sage.)
>>>> - #1617 (Ensure complex(np.longcomplex(...)) doesn't drop the imag part)
>>>> - Fix doc build
>>>>
>>>> Python 3 specific:
>>>>
>>>> - #1604 (//-issue in distutils; infinite loop in some cases :)
>>>> - #1609 (dotblas was never used on Python 3)
>>>> - #1610 (fromfile/tofile did not stay in sync with Python 3 file handle
>>>>         position -- breaks e.g. scipy.io pretty badly)
>>>> - f2py startup script didn't run properly on Py3
>>>>
>>>> Not so many fixes so far, but I'd like to see a Numpy release with #1610
>>>> fixed before releasing Scipy with Python 3 support. Since 2.0.0 breaks
>>>> binary compatibility and merging the refactoring back may take some
>>>> time,
>>>> it would be nice to have another 1.5.x release.
>>>>
>>>> Ralf & c, opinions? I'd maybe suggest somewhere on the Oct/Nov axis.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> A 1.5.1 release soon would be good. All the issues above are already
>> committed, is there anything else that needs to go in? If not, I think an RC
>> by the end of next week (10/17) and release by the end of the month should
>> be possible.
>>
>> The one bug that I want to have fixed is #1399, which causes build
>> problems for scipy on OS X.
>>
>> Sounds good. I also have some stuff I'd like to add but won't have much
>>> time before Nov. But whatever looks good to Ralf will work for me.
>>>
>>
>> Any specific issues you have in mind?
>>
>>
> No, I just wanted to include the Laguerre and Hermite polynomials and add a
> domain keyword to the linspace method of the polynomial template. But I
> don't think these are pressing needs.
>
> These don't seem very appropriate for a bugfix release anyway. I trust your
code will be in very good shape when you add it, but let's not start
breaking our own rules for what can and cannot go in.

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20101007/486d06f3/attachment.html>