[Numpy-discussion] A 1.6.2 release?

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris@gmail....
Mon Apr 23 01:47:24 CDT 2012


On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:22 AM, Ralf Gommers
<ralf.gommers@googlemail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Ralf Gommers <
>> ralf.gommers@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Charles R Harris <
>>> charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:46 AM, Ralf Gommers <
>>>> ralf.gommers@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Charles R Harris <
>>>>> charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Given the amount of new stuff coming in 1.7 and the slip in it's
>>>>>> schedule, I wonder if it would be worth putting out a 1.6.2 release with
>>>>>> fixes for einsum, ticket 1578, perhaps some others. My reasoning is that
>>>>>> the fall releases of Fedora, Ubuntu are likely to still use 1.6 and they
>>>>>> might as well use a somewhat fixed up version. The downside is located and
>>>>>> backporting fixes is likely to be a fair amount of work. A 1.7 release
>>>>>> would be preferable, but I'm not sure when we can make that happen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Travis still sounded hopeful of being able to resolve the 1.7 issues
>>>>> relatively soon. On the other hand, even if that's done in one month we'll
>>>>> still miss Debian stable and a 1.6.2 release won't be *that* much work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's go for it I would say.
>>>>>
>>>>> Aiming for a RC on May 2nd and final release on May 16th would work
>>>>> for me.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I count 280 BUG commits since 1.6.1, so we are going to need to thin
>>>> those out.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Indeed. We can discard all commits related to NA and datetime, and then
>>> we should find some balance between how important the fixes are and how
>>> much risk there is that they break something. I agree with the couple of
>>> backports you've done so far, but I propose to do the rest via PRs.
>>>
>>
> Charles, did you have some practical way in mind to select these commits?
> We could split it up by time range or by submodules for example. I'd prefer
> the latter. You would be able to do a better job of the commits touching
> numpy/core than I. How about you do that one and the polynomial module, and
> I do the rest?
>
>
I'll give it a shot. I thought the first thing I would try is a search on
tickets. We'll also need to track things and I haven't thought of a good
way to do that apart from making a list and checking things off. I don't
think there was too much polynomial fixing, mostly new stuff, but I'd like
to use the current documentation. I don't know how you manage that for
releases.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20120423/da91e463/attachment.html 


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list