Absolutely it would be good if others can test. All I was suggesting is that we do run a pretty decent set of tests upon build and that would be helpful.
If the numpy build recipes are not available, it is only because they have not been updated to use conda-build yet. If somebody wants to volunteer to convert all of our internal recipes to conda-build recipes so they could be open source --- we would welcome the help. But, it's not just the numpy recipes, it's the downstream binaries and their test-suite as well that is useful to run. I am hoping we will have something automatic here in the next few months on anaconda.org that will make this easier -- but no promises at this point. -Travis On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 2:19 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Sep 21, 2015 11:51 PM, "Travis Oliphant" <tra...@continuum.io> wrote: > > > > Of course it will be 1.10.0 final where all the problems will show up > suddenly :-) > > > > Perhaps we can get to where we are testing Anaconda against beta > releases better. > > The most useful thing would actually not even involve you doing any more > testing, but just if you could make builds available so that end-users > could easily conda install the prereleases and do their own testing against > their own choice. In principle I guess we could provide our own binstar > channel for this, but it's difficult given that AFAIK rebuilding numpy in > conda requires also rebuilding the whole stack, and the numpy build recipes > are still proprietary. > > -n > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > -- *Travis Oliphant* *Co-founder and CEO* @teoliphant 512-222-5440 http://www.continuum.io
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
