[Numpy-discussion] About ready to start 1.8 release process.

Chris Barker - NOAA Federal chris.barker@noaa....
Wed Aug 14 11:00:45 CDT 2013

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Charles R Harris
<charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wish it were. It seems unreasonably difficult to get constructive
> feedback. Chris is pretty much the only one making the attempt and that
> discussion petered out.

well, Nathaniel Smith chimed in, and Mark Weibe commented a bit (as he
wrote the code in the first place). Wes McKinney also chimed in,
essentially saying that Pandas mostly has to do its own thing, and I'm
pretty sure would prefer that the current TZ converting was ripped out
as I suggest.

In the thread on the mialing list I started:


A bunch of core people chimed in. I just re-read that thread and
provide a summary below:

 - No one said they liked it as it is, and there were a number of +1
(and even a +10) comment to cleaning up the current conversion issues.

Some folks would like "real" improvements:
  - proper, full time zone handling
  - proper (or maybe just better?) handling of leap-seconds, and all that.

 - Marc Weibe had a suggestion or two that were "not a trivial
addition" -- so off the table for this release, and would need some
real discussion, a NEP, and developer time...

- Marc also pointed out that handling the Locale time zone is helpful
for the interactive use case, which is a major numpy use-case.
However, doing it half-way isn't really helpful anyway.

- Marc also commented that making datetime64 time-zone naive would be
"the easy way"

- There was also discussion about having a settable epoch -- I think
that would be really useful, but not for this release, and would
require a NEP, etc...

- From Travis O.:"It seems to me that the biggest issue is just the
automatic conversion that is occurring on string or date-time input.
We should stop using the local time-zone (explicit is better than
implicit strikes again) and not use any time-zone unless time-zone
information is provided in the string. I am definitely +1 on that."

My conclusions:

The current code is not really usable for ANY use without careful
checking of inputs and/or work-arounds.

No one involved in the numpy list would mind removing the time zone
translation on I/O. A number of people would find it a real
improvement. (granted most users don't get involved with these
discussion on the list....)

There are some great ideas for how to improve it that would require
NEPs, discussion and real developer time -- that's not happening any
time soon.

Ripping out the translation on I/O would be fairly easy (at least for
someone familiar with the code)

So I say let's do it!

But who? Travis offered up himself and Mark as possibilities, but who
knows what their schedules allow at this point -- are either of you
following this thread?

It's probably not too big a deal for anyone familiar with the numpy
code base -- if no one else steps up, I can give it a try, though I'm
sure I wouldn't have even found what code to edit in the time it would
take Mark to fix it.



Christopher Barker, Ph.D.

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R            (206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list