[SciPy-dev] The future of SciPy and its development infrastructure

josef.pktd@gmai... josef.pktd@gmai...
Mon Feb 23 10:43:59 CST 2009


On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Robert Cimrman <cimrman3@ntc.zcu.cz> wrote:
> Hi Stéfan,
>
> Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>> Implementation:
>>
>> Enthought generously hosts SciPy, and I hope they will continue doing so.
>> New software will need to be installed on the server, but we have many hands
>> willing to tackle that task: David Cournapeau and myself included.  Before
>> deploying to scipy.org, *we will configure a *different* server as a proof
>> of concept.*
>>
>> 1) *Distributed revision control system: David Cournapeau and myself have
>> been test driving Git [1] on SciPy and NumPy for a while.  It is fast, well
>> supported, has great branch support, and is simple to use for the average
>> contributor, while allowing powerful patch-carving for the more adventurous.
>> *
>
> Going git would make my life as an occasional numpy/scipy contributor
> really a lot easier, so big +1!
>
> cheers,
> r.

I'm pretty happy with svn; it is relatively simple and has good
integration and GUI tools on Windows. From all I read, git would be a
big barrier for casual users (of git). From all the descriptions I've
read, git is powerful for "command line junkies" who remember a large
number of commands and options but not for occasional users of it. But
I never installed git, because some time ago when I compared bazar,
mercurial, git still didn't have much support on windows.

One problem is that the bazar mirror of scipy on launchpad still fails
to import, but otherwise working with mirrors for the different
version control system would creating patches easier for users of
scipy, for example before my committ access to scipy, I used bzrsvn to
maintain my local branches.

My main problem with trac tickets are missing tests, not the actual
applying of the patch or bugfixes. I think low test coverage and weak
testing "culture" is more of a problem than the revision control
system. From what I have seen in the scipy code, it is true that, if
it doesn't have a test, it is broken with high probability.

Josef


More information about the Scipy-dev mailing list