Re: [Numpy-discussion] Merge of generalised ufuncs branch
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The generalised ufuncs branch was made available before SciPy'08. We > solicited comments on its implementation and structuring, but received > very little feedback. Unless there are any further comments from the > community, I propose that we merge it. +1 -- Jarrod Millman Computational Infrastructure for Research Labs 10 Giannini Hall, UC Berkeley phone: 510.643.4014 http://cirl.berkeley.edu/ ___ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Merge of generalised ufuncs branch
2008/10/7 Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The generalised ufuncs branch was made available before SciPy'08. We > solicited comments on its implementation and structuring, but received > very little feedback. Unless there are any further comments from the > community, I propose that we merge it. Sounds good to me - I've counted at least three or four threads on the mailing lists wishing for the ufuncized linear algebra this would allow since it was put forward. (Of course, these won't appear until someone implements them - perhaps a start would be for someone to write a tutorial on using the new generalized ufunc code...) > It is unfortunate that we have so many patches waiting for review > (SciPy suffers worst, I'm afraid); clearly there are too few hours in > a day. Nothing discourages contributions as much as a stale project, > and I hope we can avoid that. The problem may perhaps be that not many people feel they are in a position to actually do the reviews, so that everyone is waiting on an imagined few "real" developers to place the Official Stamp of Approval. Perhaps an informal rule of thumb for acceptance of patches? How about: posted to list, reviewed by someone not the author who's had at least one patch accepted before, and no objections on the list? Anything that receives objections can fall through to the usual decision by discussion on the mailing list, this is just intended for those patches that everyone just kind of shrugs and says "looks all right to me". Anne ___ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Merge of generalised ufuncs branch
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi all, > > The generalised ufuncs branch was made available before SciPy'08. We > solicited comments on its implementation and structuring, but received > very little feedback. Unless there are any further comments from the > community, I propose that we merge it. > > It is unfortunate that we have so many patches waiting for review > (SciPy suffers worst, I'm afraid); clearly there are too few hours in > a day. Nothing discourages contributions as much as a stale project, > and I hope we can avoid that. > I've been thinking it's about time to get to this. Can you start by merging as much of the current trunk as you can so we can concentrate on the differences? Chuck ___ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Merge of generalised ufuncs branch
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The generalised ufuncs branch was made available before SciPy'08. We >> solicited comments on its implementation and structuring, but received >> very little feedback. Unless there are any further comments from the >> community, I propose that we merge it. >> >> It is unfortunate that we have so many patches waiting for review >> (SciPy suffers worst, I'm afraid); clearly there are too few hours in >> a day. Nothing discourages contributions as much as a stale project, >> and I hope we can avoid that. >> > > I've been thinking it's about time to get to this. Can you start by merging > as much of the current trunk as you can so we can concentrate on the > differences? > Or maybe just start a new branch and see if the patch still applies. Chuck > > ___ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
