[Numpy-discussion] Created NumPy 1.7.x branch
Charles R Harris
Sat Jun 23 07:12:29 CDT 2012
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Thouis (Ray) Jones <email@example.com>wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:14 AM, Charles R Harris
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > What has been done in the past is that an intent to fork is announced
> > two weeks in advance so that people can weigh in on what needs to be done
> > before the fork. The immediate fork was a bit hasty. Likewise, when I
> > suggested going to the github issue tracking, I opened a discussion on
> > needed tags, but voila, there it was with an incomplete set and no
> > discussion. That to seemed hasty.
> I don't have a particular dog in this fight, but it seems like neither
> creating the fork nor turning on issues are worth disagreeing to much
> about. There's going to be a 1.7 fork sometime soon, and whether it
> gets created now or after discussion seems mostly academic. Even if
> there were changes that needed to go into both branches, git makes
> that straightforward. Likewise github issues. Turning them on has
> minimal cost, especially given that pull requests already go through
> github, and gives another route for bug reporting and a way to
> experiment with issues to inform the discussion.
>From my point of view, the haste seems to be driven by SciPy2012. And why
the rush after we have wasted three months running in circles for lack of a
decision, with Mark and Nathaniel sent off to write a report that had no
impact on the final outcome. The github thing also ended the thread and now
someone has to clean up the result. It also appears that that work is being
done by request rather than by a volunteer, that has subtle implications in
the long run.
Things have been happening by fits and starts, with issues picked up and
than dropped half done. That isn't a good way to move forward.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion