[Numpy-discussion] numpy 1.7.0 release?

Bruce Southey bsouthey@gmail....
Fri Jan 6 19:45:31 CST 2012


On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Ralf Gommers
<ralf.gommers@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Charles R Harris
>> <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ralf,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Ralf Gommers
>>> <ralf.gommers@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> It's been a little over 6 months since the release of 1.6.0 and the NA
>>>> debate has quieted down, so I'd like to ask your opinion on the timing of
>>>> 1.7.0. It looks to me like we have a healthy amount of bug fixes and small
>>>> improvements, plus three larger chucks of work:
>>>>
>>>> - datetime
>>>> - NA
>>>> - Bento support
>>>>
>>>> My impression is that both datetime and NA are releasable, but should be
>>>> labeled "tech preview" or something similar, because they may still see
>>>> significant changes. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
>>>>
>>>> There's still some maintenance work to do and pull requests to merge,
>>>> but a beta release by Christmas should be feasible. What do you all think?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm now thinking that is too optimistic. There are a fair number of
>>> tickets that need to be looked at, including some for einsum and the
>>> iterator, and I think the number of pull requests needs to be reduced. How
>>> about sometime in the beginning of January?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, it certainly was. Besides the tickets and pull requests, we also need
>> the support for MinGW 4.x that David is looking at. If that goes smoothly
>> then the first week of January may be feasible, otherwise it'll have to be
>> February (I'm traveling for most of Jan). Or someone else has to volunteer
>> to be the release manager for this release.
>
>
> There isn't really much progress here. Besides a few smaller issues that
> still need attention, I think the MinGW 4.x issue is a blocker and needs to
> be resolved. This can be done either by making it work, or deciding to stick
> with 3.x. In the latter case numpy.datetime should be fixed somehow.
>
> For the next three weeks I'm traveling and won't be able to do any work on
> numpy. I propose to keep master in a state that's (close to being)
> releasable until the blocker issue is resolved and we can create a 1.7.x
> branch.
>
> Ralf
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>

I think that my ticket 1973
(http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/1973) "Can not display a
masked array containing np.NA values even if masked" that is due to
the astype function not handling the NA object is also a blocker.

Bruce


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list