[Numpy-discussion] numpy 2.0, what else to do?

[Travis Oliphant]

--
(mobile phone of)
Travis Oliphant
Enthought, Inc.
1-512-536-1057
http://www.enthought.com

On Feb 13, 2010, at 2:34 PM, Jarrod Millman <millman@berkeley.edu>  
wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Travis Oliphant <oliphant@enthought.com 
> > wrote:
>> This is exactly what I was worried about with calling the next  
>> release
>> 2.0.
>>
>> This is not the time to change all the things we wish were done
>> differently.
>>
>> The release is scheduled for 3 weeks.
>
> Hey Travis,
>
> I agree with your general sentiment (and I assume Chuck does too).
> And I don't think either of us is suggesting that we change all the
> things we want done differently.  I do think that it is reasonable for
> us to suggest a few changes that could be implemented quickly to the
> list and just have a quick up or down vote on that specific issue
> without having to have a general discussion regarding what 2.0 is.
>

OK.

> So there are at least three suggestions on the table right now:
>
> 1.  I would like to add deprecation warnings for the numarray and
> numeric support (but leave all the code in at least until the 3.0
> release).
>
+1

> 2.  Chuck proposed requiring explicit imports for things like fft.
>

+0

> 3.  Chuck also suggested deprecating the old polynomial support and
> make it not be imported by default.
>

I need to review his Poly class before giving a vote.  I don't like  
the fact that it removes pretty printing by default.

-Travis


> These things are relatively small and easy to implement.  If someone
> is willing to do the work within, say a week, I think we should go for
> it.  I am sure others may disagree.
>
> Why can't we just agree that the release is scheduled for 3 weeks from
> now.  And if someone suggests a change that they commit to
> implementing in one weeks time and that won't require very much new
> code (for instance a deprecation warning), let's just vote for or
> against it.  If it seems like people are generally in favor of the
> change, let's include it.
>
> So without changing the timing of the next release, would you still be
> against the three changes suggested by Chuck and me?  I am in favor of
> making the above three changes as long as they don't add a ton of new
> code, functionality, or delay the release in any way.  What do other
> people think?
>
> Thanks,
> Jarrod
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion