Re: [Numpy-discussion] NEP process update

2017-12-06 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Jarrod Millman wrote: > I was planning on looking at/working on the main doc generating system > and the main webpage (for numpy and scipy) soon (over the winter > break), but I didn't want to get too many things in the discussion > right now. My immediate interes

Re: [Numpy-discussion] NEP process update

2017-12-06 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:39 PM, wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> - NEPs are really part of the development process, not an

Re: [Numpy-discussion] NEP process update

2017-12-06 Thread Marten van Kerkwijk
Would be great to have structure, and especially a template - ideally, the latter is enough for someone to create a NEP, i.e., has lots of in-template documentation. One thing I'd recommend thinking a little about is to what extend a NEP is "frozen" after acceptance. In astropy we've seen situatio

Re: [Numpy-discussion] NEP process update

2017-12-06 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would be great to have structure, and especially a template - ideally, > the latter is enough for someone to create a NEP, i.e., has lots of > in-template documentation. > > One thing I'd recommend thinking a