[SciPy-dev] Scipy workflow (and not tools).
Charles R Harris
Wed Feb 25 13:22:21 CST 2009
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Matthew Brett <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote:
> >> Tests protect the user and the developer alike. It is irresponsible
> >> to carry on the way we do.
> > No it's not.
> Scipy is rarely released. David and Stefan are saying that it is very
> hard to release.
> It might be true, that continuing with the organic, 'add it if it
> seems good' approach, will be fine. But it might also be true that
> it will make Scipy grind to a halt, as it becomes too poorly
> structured and tested to maintain.
> rates Numpy / Scipy / matplotlib as 'immature'. This is mainly
> because of Scipy, and it's fair. It we want it to change we have to
> be able to release versions that have good documentation and low bug
> The choices we make now are going to have long-lasting consequences for
> I think our best guess, from what David and Stefan are saying, that we
> need a change towards more structured process. I stress the word
> "need". This doesn't seem surprising to me. I think we've got to
> listen to them, because they are doing the work of maintaining and
> releasing Scipy.
Much of Scipy *isn't* maintained, that is why it is immature. There are
parts that need to be worked over and rationalized and that isn't happening.
You can't review code that hasn't been written. Some of that is history: the
initial impetus in Scipy was interfacing existing C and Fortran libraries
with Python and scratching itches. But that isn't the same as putting
together a large package with smoothly interacting parts and verified
results. And before that can happen we need more people working on the
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Scipy-dev