[Numpy-discussion] Removing datetime support for 1.4.x series ?

Travis Oliphant oliphant@enthought....
Mon Feb 8 15:43:40 CST 2010

On Feb 8, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Jarrod Millman  
> <millman@berkeley.edu> wrote:
> I went ahead and set the default download for NumPy back to the 1.3.0
> release on sourceforge.  I also added a news item stating that 1.4.0
> has temporarily been pulled due to the unintended ABI break pending a
> decision by the developers.  Currently, the 1.4.0 release can still be
> accessed if you go to the download manager for sourceforge.
> I think we need to make that decision now. It seems to have gotten  
> hung up in conflicts that need to be resolved. How should we go  
> about it? Does the numpy steering council (name?) have a role here.

It seems like consensus has been reached on making 1.4.1 an ABI  
compatible release.

The remaining question is what to call the next release of NumPy 1.5  
or 2.0.

I would prefer to call it 1.5 because 2.0 "sounds" like it's  
significantly different from a use-level than 1.4, but it won't be.     
While it is a pain to update all your packages, we just make clear  
that with NumPy 1.5 you have to re-compile extensions built with it.    
Yes, that is a break with what we thought would be the pattern used at  
SciPy 2008, but it has been many years since an ABI break has  
occurred, and I wouldn't mind updating the pattern.

I don't really like the idea of tying the version number to the ABI  
number anyway.    This was one reason to put an actual ABI number in  
the source code to begin with (so that it could be queried  
independently of the version number).

I do agree that the ABI should not change much.  But, sometimes it is  
unavoidable.    This rare occurrence should really be independent of  
the version number system which should be allowed to change  
independently based on the API alterations.

I'm not really much in to "majority-wins" kinds of approaches (I much  
prefer consensus when it can be reached).  But, in this case I think  
the majority of David, Pauli, Chuck, Robert, and I should decide the  


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100208/616dcab2/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list