[Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

Wes McKinney wesmckinn at gmail.com
Wed May 2 17:25:08 EDT 2012

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Charles R Harris
<charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Pauli Virtanen <pav at iki.fi> wrote:
>>> 01.05.2012 21:34, Ralf Gommers kirjoitti:
>>> [clip]
>>> > At this point it's probably good to look again at the problems we want
>>> > to solve:
>>> > 1. responsive user interface (must absolutely have)
>>> Now that it comes too late: with some luck, I've possibly hit on what
>>> was ailing the Tracs (max_diff_bytes configured too large). Let's see if
>>> things work better from now on...
>> That's amazing - not only does it not give errors anymore, it's also an
>> order of magnitude faster.
> So maybe we could just stick with trac. Performance was really the sticking
> point.
> Chuck
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

FWIW I'm pretty strongly in favor of GHI for NumPy/SciPy (I am going
to get involved in NumPy dev eventually, promise). While warty in some
of the places already mentioned, I have found it to be very
low-friction and low-annoyance in my own dev process (nearing 1000
issues closed in the last year in pandas). But there are fewer cooks
in the kitchen with pandas so perhaps this experience wouldn't be
identical with NumPy. The biggest benefit I've seen is community
involvement that you really wouldn't see if I were using a Trac or
something else hosted elsewhere. Users are on GitHub and it for some
reason gives people a feeling of engagement in the open source process
that I don't see anywhere else.

- Wes

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list