On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:52 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>> On 6/26/2012 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
For the main repos we use buildbot and test on:
Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit
Debian sid 64-bit
OSX 10.4 PPC
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> On 6/26/2012 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>>> For the main repos we use buildbot and test on:
>>>
>>> Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit
>>> Debian sid 64-bit
>>> OSX 10.4 PPC
>>> OSX 10.5 Intel
>>> Debian wheezy PPC
>>> Debian squeeze ARM (a
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Peter Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:20 AM, John Hunter wrote:
> >> because the original developers are gone. So people are loathe to
> >> upgrade. It is certainly true that deprecations t
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:20 AM, John Hunter wrote:
>> because the original developers are gone. So people are loathe to
>> upgrade. It is certainly true that deprecations that have lived for a
>> single point release cycle have not bee
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:20 AM, John Hunter wrote:
> > Some examples would be nice. A lot of people did move already. And I
> haven't
> > seen reports of those that tried and got stuck. Also, Debian and
> Python(x,
> > y) have 1.6.2, EPD has 1.6.1.
>
> In my company, the numpy for our production
> Some examples would be nice. A lot of people did move already. And I haven't
> seen reports of those that tried and got stuck. Also, Debian and Python(x,
> y) have 1.6.2, EPD has 1.6.1.
In my company, the numpy for our production python install is well
behind 1.6. In the world of trading, the u
On 06/26/2012 06:15 PM, Skipper Seabold wrote:
> My uninformed opinion from the sidelines: For me, this begged the
> question of why projects would wait so long and be upgrading 1.5.x ->
> 1.7.x. it sounded to me like an outreach problem.
lenny: none
squeeze: 1.4.1
wheezy: 1.6.2
hardy: 1.0.4
luci
On 6/26/2012 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> For the main repos we use buildbot and test on:
>>
>> Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit
>> Debian sid 64-bit
>> OSX 10.4 PPC
>> OSX 10.5 Intel
>> Debian wheezy PPC
>> Debian squeeze ARM (a Raspberry PI no less)
>> WIndows XP 32 bit
>> SPARC (courtesy of our frie
Hi Matthew,
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Ondřej Čertík
>> wrote:
>>> Do you use anything else besides Travis CI?
>>
>> Yes, we use both Shining Panda and Travis CI:
>>
Hi Fernando,
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Ondřej Čertík
> wrote:
>> Do you use anything else besides Travis CI?
>
> Yes, we use both Shining Panda and Travis CI:
>
> https://jenkins.shiningpanda.com/ipython/
With NumPy, I am still th
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> For the main repos we use buildbot and test on:
>>
>> Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit
>> Debian sid 64-bit
>> OSX 10.4 PPC
>> OSX 10.5 Intel
>> Debian wheezy PPC
>> Debian squeeze ARM (a Raspberry PI no less)
>> WIndows XP 32 bit
>> SPARC (cou
> For the main repos we use buildbot and test on:
>
> Ubuntu Maverick 32-bit
> Debian sid 64-bit
> OSX 10.4 PPC
> OSX 10.5 Intel
> Debian wheezy PPC
> Debian squeeze ARM (a Raspberry PI no less)
> WIndows XP 32 bit
> SPARC (courtesy of our friends at NeuroDebian)
>
> http://nipy.bic.berkeley.edu/
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Ondřej Čertík
> wrote:
>> Do you use anything else besides Travis CI?
>
> Yes, we use both Shining Panda and Travis CI:
>
> https://jenkins.shiningpanda.com/ipython/
> http://travis-ci.org/#!/ipython/i
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> Do you use anything else besides Travis CI?
Yes, we use both Shining Panda and Travis CI:
https://jenkins.shiningpanda.com/ipython/
http://travis-ci.org/#!/ipython/ipython
The SP setup is more complete, including Mac and Windows bots.
> I
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> One issues is the one that Sage identified about the array interface
>> regression as noted by Jason. Any other regressions from 1.5.x need to be
>> addressed as well. We'll h
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Skipper Seabold wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>>> One issues is the one that Sage identified about the array interface
>>> regression as noted by Jason. Any other regr
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> One issues is the one that Sage identified about the array interface
>> regression as noted by Jason. Any other regressions from 1.5.x need to be
>> addressed as well. We'll h
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> One issues is the one that Sage identified about the array interface
> regression as noted by Jason. Any other regressions from 1.5.x need to be
> addressed as well. We'll have to decide on a case-by-case basis if there
> are issues t
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, I think there are issues we are just now seeing with code
>> that was released in 1.6.x, and there are many people who have not moved
>> forward to 1.6.x yet.
>>
>
> Some examples would be nice. A lot of people did move a
>
> Unfortunately, I think there are issues we are just now seeing with code that
> was released in 1.6.x, and there are many people who have not moved forward
> to 1.6.x yet.
>
> Some examples would be nice. A lot of people did move already. And I haven't
> seen reports of those that tr
On 6/26/12 2:48 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> Unfortunately, I think there are issues we are just now seeing with
> code that was released in 1.6.x, and there are many people who have
> not moved forward to 1.6.x yet.
>
>
> Some examples would be nice.
I'll bite. Here's an issue that pre
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Jun 26, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> After some more investigation, I'm not optimistic that we will be able to
>> get a 1.7 release out bef
On Jun 26, 2012, at 2:10 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> After some more investigation, I'm not optimistic that we will be able to get
> a 1.7 release out before SciPy. I would like to get a beta release out by
> SciP
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> After some more investigation, I'm not optimistic that we will be able to
> get a 1.7 release out before SciPy. I would like to get a beta release
> out by SciPy (or even an rc1 release). But, given the number of code
> c
Hey all,
After some more investigation, I'm not optimistic that we will be able to get a
1.7 release out before SciPy. I would like to get a beta release out by SciPy
(or even an rc1 release). But, given the number of code changes and
differences between 1.5.x and 1.7, I think we will nee
25 matches
Mail list logo
