On May 25, 2010, at 5:06 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Charles R Harris > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sounds good, but what if it doesn't get finished in a few months? I think we >> should get 2.0.0 out pronto, ideally it would already have been released. I >> think a major refactoring like this proposal should get the 3.0.0 label. > > Naming it 3.0 or 2.1 does not matter much - I think we should avoid > breaking things twice. I can see a few solutions: > - postpone 2.0 "indefinitely", until this new work is done > - backport py3k changes to 1.5 (which would be API and ABI > compatible with 1.4.1), and 2.0 would contain all the breaking > changes.
This is an interesting idea and also workable. > > I am really worried about breaking things once now and once in a few > months (or even a year). I am too. That's why this discussion. We will have the NumPy refactor done by end of July at the latest. Numpy 2.0 should be able to come out in August. -Travis > > David > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion --- Travis Oliphant Enthought, Inc. oliph...@enthought.com 1-512-536-1057 http://www.enthought.com _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
