On 10/07/2010 08:45 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Charles R Harris
<charlesr.har...@gmail.com <mailto:charlesr.har...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:34 AM, Ralf Gommers
<ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com <mailto:ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com>>
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Charles R Harris
<charlesr.har...@gmail.com <mailto:charlesr.har...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Pauli Virtanen <p...@iki.fi
<mailto:p...@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
<http://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
I agree that this is a good idea to have this minor release with as few
changes as possible. This allows us to clearly state everything has
moved to git and localize any problems that users should not have
related to the switch. That way the change to git should reach people
who don't follow the list.
Note that the Download page, http://www.scipy.org/Download, for numpy
under the 'Bleeding-edge repository access' still indicates the svn yet
the developer zone page says git.
Bruce
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
