[Numpy-discussion] Merging the refactor.
Charles R Harris
Thu Nov 11 15:30:32 CST 2010
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Pauli Virtanen <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:38:53 -0700, Charles R Harris wrote:
> > I'd like to open a discussion about the steps to be followed in merging
> > the numpy refactor. I have two concerns about this. First, the refactor
> > repository branched off some time ago and I'm concerned about code
> > divergence, not just in the refactoring, but in fixes going into the
> > master branch on github. Second, it is likely that a flag day will look
> > like the easiest solution and I think we should avoid that.
> What is a "flag day"?
It all goes in as one big commit.
> > At the moment it seems to me that the changes can be broken up into
> > three categories:
> > 1) Movement of files and resulting changes to the build process.
> > 2) Refactoring of the files for CPython.
> > 3) Addition of an IronPython interface.
> > I'd like to see 1) go into the master branch as soon as possible,
> > followed by 2) so that the changes can be tested and fixes will go into
> > a common repository. The main github repository can then be branched for
> > adding the IronPython stuff. In short, I think it would be usefull to
> > abandon the teoliphant fork at some point and let the work continue in a
> > fork of the numpy repository.
> The first step I would like to see is to re-graft the teoliphant branch
> onto the current Git history -- currently, it's still based on Git-SVN.
> Re-grafting would make incremental merging and tracking easier. Luckily,
> this is easy to do thanks to Git's data model (I have a script for it),
> and I believe it could be useful to do it ASAP.
I agree that would be an excellent start. Speaking of repo surgery, you
might find esr's latest project <http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=2727> of
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion