Chris:

How are you going to present & store this ?
This question seems to pop up once in a while on this list.

Only 1 change: apart from mainly using 2.4.5, I also use 2.4.7
http://packages.ubuntu.com/precise/pdl

I will be upgrading to Ubuntu 14.04 in 2014.
As I see it now, that will be 2.4.11 at least:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/pdl

http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=pdl

All calculations on energy use of trains for the Netherlands Railroads are done 
in Perl/PDL:

http://conference.europoint.eu/railwaysandenvironment/friday.htm
sheet 13:
* NS makes use of a system for feedback without the need
for energy metering on the trains
• Makes use of section occupation data and smart statistics
• Speed profile and relative energy consumption (light
version, Hoogenraad Interface Services)

The predictions of number of travellers for the Netherlands Railroads are at 
least partially done in perl/PDL:

http://www.vvs-or.nl/db/upload/documents/Journals/STAtOR/STAtOR_2010-1_totaal.pdf



Why perl/PDL:
* easy I/O and cleaning of contaminated data
* quick to program
* calculations easily distributed over a cluster
* PDL (Perl Data Language) is great: the power matlab with the I/O
and speed of Perl.



Chris Marshall wrote:
> Dear PDL Users-
>
> In an effort to gauge the progess of PDL development in functionality
> and usability, I would invite you to reply to me or to list with a quick
> message about your PDL use:
>
> - How long have you used PDL?
> - What PDL version do you use?
> - Best thing(s) about PDL
> - Worst thing(s) about PDL
> - I would use PDL more (or at all) if only ...
> - Any suggestions for PDL development?
>
> The goal is to improve the PDL experience and to encourage a
> broader PDL user community.
>
> Thanks much,
> Chris Marshall (PDL-2.007 release manager)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Perldl mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
>

--- Begin Message ---
Chris:

Do you know who in the pd active world is the contact to Henning Glawe ?

http://qa.debian.org/[email protected]#pdl

Probably the best way to go is try to make a new PDL-2.4.10 debian package (including the fixed broken links) and let me have a try in using it.

Jan Hoogenraad wrote:
I am very happy with 2.4.5, but would be willing to give a packaged 2.4.10 a try. I do not know how to package in debian / ubuntu, but can help with testing.

Note that the current LTS release has 2.4.5 and the
http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/pdl

The latest non-LTS release has 2.4.7 currently as target
http://packages.ubuntu.com/oneiric/pdl


Chris Marshall wrote:
OK.  If you are interested after PDL-2.4.10, we could take
a look at a private build for PDL on your system.  It is much
smoother now and I would like it to build cleanly where
possible.  If we can give feedback to the debian packagers
it might be possible that the backport could happen for PDL
too....

Cheers,
Chris

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Jan Hoogenraad<[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks. I keep using the LTS (long time support) versions of Ubuntu,
This current version is 10.04 LTS. Upgrades in packages are mainly
security-driven. This year, there will be 12.04 LTS to which I will upgrade.
http://www.ubuntu.com/business/desktop/overview
Thus, I will always use relatively old (but stable) versions.
For some modules, the debian / ubuntu maintainers make backport packages so
that the Ubuntu 11.10 versions are also usable in 10.04.
This is not the case for PDL.



chm wrote:
On 1/23/2012 1:03 PM, Jan Hoogenraad wrote:
As a simple user (not PDL developer), running about 4 processors
full-time with PDL code (yes: I USE PDL), I have not used CPAN at all,
not will do so in the near future.
I have tried PDL from CPAN, but after it started downloading hundreds of
packages (including half of perl, which it deemed outdated), it still
did not run with my pre-compiled perl. So I gave up on that.
I never use PDL plotting.

For stability&  configuration management, I use Ubuntu (=debian)
packages. (current version: PDL v2.4.5 (supports bad values))

For what it is worth, the latest stable PDL package
for debian is for version 2.4.7. The current PDL-2.4.10
release candidate is testing the best of all previous
PDL versions so you may wish to consider an upgrade at
some point.

Cheers,
Chris


<<attachment: jan.vcf>>


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I now see your later mails.

Anyway: thanks for the link:
It points out that PDL updates are waiting on a plplot update.

http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=pdl

Also, I now the packages using pdl:
http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?waiting=pdl

   1. libpdl-io-hdf5-perl (150 days old) is waiting for pdl:
   2. libtfbs-perl (153 days old) is waiting for pdl:
   3. libpdl-netcdf-perl (356 days old) is waiting for pdl:

Ubuntu popcon for those packages:

Package: libpdl-fit-levmar-perl             0     2     0     0
Package: libpdl-netcdf-perl                 0    67     0     0
Package: libpdl-io-hdf5-perl                0    24     1     0
Package: libtfbs-perl                       1    93     4     0

They do not seem to be the reason for Ubuntu PDL installations, as suggested in the mail group.


p valdes wrote:
To much good to be true efectively:

67 regular users of PDL package after Ubuntu plus 84 regular users of
PDL in Debian that have the popularity contest activated



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I should have known the Ubuntu pop contest is a copy from debian ...

Would you mind posting those numbers to the Perldl mail group ?
I would appreciate if you do that, as I don't want to take credit for data I did not supply out of ignorance.



p valdes wrote:
And more than 115.000 people use pdl regularly in Debian...



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
OK.  If you are interested after PDL-2.4.10, we could take
a look at a private build for PDL on your system.  It is much
smoother now and I would like it to build cleanly where
possible.  If we can give feedback to the debian packagers
it might be possible that the backport could happen for PDL
too....

Cheers,
Chris

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Jan Hoogenraad <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks. I keep using the LTS (long time support) versions of Ubuntu,
> This current version is 10.04 LTS. Upgrades in packages are mainly
> security-driven. This year, there will be 12.04 LTS to which I will upgrade.
> http://www.ubuntu.com/business/desktop/overview
> Thus, I will always use relatively old (but stable) versions.
> For some modules, the debian / ubuntu maintainers make backport packages so
> that the Ubuntu 11.10 versions are also usable in 10.04.
> This is not the case for PDL.
>
>
>
> chm wrote:
>>
>> On 1/23/2012 1:03 PM, Jan Hoogenraad wrote:
>>>
>>> As a simple user (not PDL developer), running about 4 processors
>>> full-time with PDL code (yes: I USE PDL), I have not used CPAN at all,
>>> not will do so in the near future.
>>> I have tried PDL from CPAN, but after it started downloading hundreds of
>>> packages (including half of perl, which it deemed outdated), it still
>>> did not run with my pre-compiled perl. So I gave up on that.
>>> I never use PDL plotting.
>>>
>>> For stability & configuration management, I use Ubuntu (=debian)
>>> packages. (current version: PDL v2.4.5 (supports bad values))
>>
>>
>> For what it is worth, the latest stable PDL package
>> for debian is for version 2.4.7. The current PDL-2.4.10
>> release candidate is testing the best of all previous
>> PDL versions so you may wish to consider an upgrade at
>> some point.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I don't know what other modules depend on PDL.
Bioperl in lucid did not depend on PDL directly
http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/science/bioperl
Anyway: the numbers are lower:

Package: bioperl                          107  2117    15     1
Package: bioperl-run                       11   989    21     0

Apparently, for developers there is a command: reverse-build-depends
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevTools
I don't have sufficient source packages to run it on pdl.

David Mertens wrote:
Thanks! That's an astounding number, but I think it's probably an
overestimate. For example, I suspect that many of those people are
through dependencies rather than direct usage. I know that  some BioPerl
modules depend on PDL.

But, at least we know that thousands of people use PDL, whether directly
or indirectly. That's pretty cool!

David

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jan Hoogenraad
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    FYI: Of the 2016510 users that report their package usage from
    Ubuntu, 7332 use PDL. This is higher than other numbers I have seen
    in this mailing list.

    http://popcon.ubuntu.com/

    #The fields below are the sum for all the packages maintained by that
    #developer:
    #
    #<inst> is the number of people who installed this package;
    #<vote> is the number of people who use this package regularly;
    #<old> is the number of people who installed, but don't use this package
    #      regularly;
    #<recent> is the number of people who upgraded this package recently;
    #<no-files> is the number of people whose entry didn't contain enough
    #           information (atime and ctime were 0).
    #rank name                            inst  vote   old recent no-files


    Package: pdl                               73  7332    21     1

    Package: base-files                     182932 2016510  6389   318



_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl


--- End Message ---

<<attachment: jan.vcf>>

_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl

Reply via email to