On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Kurt Smith<[email protected]> wrote: > I think its best that fwrap be its own package, distributed separately > from Cython. That was the vibe I got from those at the SciPy 2009 > conference and from the recent thread on Fwrap's licensing. The added > benefit is that fwrap won't weigh Cython down w.r.t. licensing issues > or be an impediment to Cython's acceptance into the Python std. lib. > > Presuming that everyone here agrees with the above (or doesn't care), > the remaining question is where to host it. Since fwrap is still > closely linked to Cython, I think a natural spot for the mercurial > repo would be on Cython's servers. No strong feelings here -- I'm > just as happy putting it on bitbucket. Fwrap would *not* clutter up > Cython's trac, or Cython's wiki. These would be elsewhere. >
As the own of Cython's servers, I hereby certainly offer you hosting space. -- William _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
