[SciPy-User] Contributing to SciPy was Re: Least-squares fittings with bounds: why is scipy not up to the task?

[Ralf Gommers]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM, denis <denis-bz-gg at t-online.de> wrote:

> On Mar 14, 3:17 pm, David Warde-Farley <warde... at iro.umontreal.ca>
> wrote:
> > On 2012-03-14, at 6:12 AM, Scott Sinclair wrote:
> > I agree, certain sorts of recipes are a better fit than others. However,
> it would be nice if we had some clear and simple guidelines as to what
> belongs and what doesn't rather than making it a matter of subjective
> judgment; otherwise the only fair way forward seems to be accepting almost
> everything.
>
> "Has anyone used this recipe in living memory ?"
> would be a clear guideline.
> (SO etc. track that with member voting, up / down and when.
> Is there a simple off-the-shelf voting package that we could use for
> recipes ?)
> You're right, the tradeoff isn't easy:
> accept everything -- hodepodge -- or cut through the jungle.
>

Not everything is easy to judge, it would be great if someone could take a
shot at drafting a procedure for doing so. But all I wanted to propose is
to remove things like links to external sites, duplicate links and content
that's clearly not useful anymore. Examples of the latter:
http://www.scipy.org/Cookbook/PIL
http://www.scipy.org/Cookbook/xplt
http://www.scipy.org/Cookbook/Pyrex_and_NumPy

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/scipy-user/attachments/20120314/423c9101/attachment.html>