[SciPy-dev] FFTPACK and RandomArray

Pearu Peterson pearu at cens.ioc.ee
Wed Feb 20 02:30:35 CST 2002


On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, eric wrote:

> > On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, eric wrote:
> >
> > > Just to fill everyone in, we're gonna be making fftw an "optional" package
> in
> > > SciPy.  This is because its license doesn't fit with the rest of the
> package.
> > > FFTPACK provides pretty much a drop in replacement in functionality, so no
> > > capabilities are lost.  The only drawpack is that fftw is faster.  On the
> > > upside, it will simplify the build process, and the part of the pain that
> > > Fernando suffered today will be alleviated.
> >
> > It would be nice to keep things so that users can easily use one or the
> > other though. Since fftw is GPL, for many that's ok and they may prefer to
> > use fftw. Don't know how much extra work that would mean though.
> 
> Well the wrappers will still be around, and they work quite well in the current
> state.
> I don't know if they will still be in the CVS, but they will certainly still be
> available with instructions on how to build them on the SciPy site.  For those
> interested, it'll hopefully be a drop in replacement.  Afterall, they work fine
> now in SciPy, and I don't see the fft interfaces changing much.

I am going to be definitely one user of fftw (because of its speed) and
the pain that Fernando suffered with fftw can be certainly eased as we now
know the workouts. 

But why do you want to throw the fftw wrappers out of scipy CVS? Does it
violets any licence item if distributing wrappers (to GPL'ed
codes) without distributing the corresponding libriaries?
And that with an addition check if the GPL library is present. If yes,
then triggering the wrappers extension build and making scipy to use
the fastest routiones available, though they may be GPL'ed?

Thanks,
	Pearu




More information about the Scipy-dev mailing list