[Numpy-discussion] Created NumPy 1.7.x branch
Wed Jun 27 00:25:16 CDT 2012
Travis, apologies in advance if the tone of this message is too strong -
please take it as a sign of how frustrating I find the discussion on this
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Travis Oliphant <email@example.com>wrote:
> What should have happened in this case, in my mind, is that NumPy 1.4.0
> should have been 1.5.0 and advertised that there was a break in the ABI and
> that all extensions would have to be re-built against the new version.
> This would have been some pain for one class of users (primarily package
> maintainers) and no pain for another class.
Please please stop asserting this. It's plain wrong. It has been explained
to you multiple times by multiple people how bad the consequences of
breaking the ABI are. It leads to random segfaults when existing installers
are not updated or when users pick the wrong installer by accident (which
undoubtedly some will). It also leads to a large increase in the number of
installers that maintainers for every single package that depends on numpy
will have to build. Including for releases they've already made in the past.
The assertion that users nowadays mainly use bundles like EPD or package
managers is also extremely pointless. Last week NumPy had over 7000
downloads on SF alone; the cumulative total stands at almost 1.7 million.
If even 0.1% of those downloads are of the wrong binary, that's 7 users
*every week* with a very serious problem.
API breakage is also bad, and I'm not going to argue here about which kind
of breakage is worse. What I will point out though is that we now have
datetime merged back in while keeping ABI compatibility, thanks to Mark's
efforts. That shows it's hardly ever really necessary to break the ABI.
Finally, it has been agreed several times on this list to not break the ABI
for minor releases, period. Let's please stick to that decision.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion