[SciPy-User] Pylab - standard packages

Nathaniel Smith njs@pobox....
Fri Sep 21 17:04:26 CDT 2012

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Fernando Perez <fperez.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The point of that remark was that we shouldn't set requirements that will
>> say "Python(x,y) / Spyder isn't compliant", nothing more than that.
> Actually, we *should* define something that is almost certainly *not*
> met by today's versions of epd/pythonxy/anaconda/sage/whatever.  If we
> don't, the logical implication is that we'll be defining the minimum
> common denominator of all of them, and that would be way wrong.
> What we need to find is a bar that all these projects can clear in a
> reasonable time-frame (say 6 months, give or take) and without undue
> burden on their development resources.  But not bury the bar
> underground so that everyone has already cleared it where they're
> sitting.

BTW, is there currently a problem where these distributions are
failing to update packages in a timely fashion? I'm a little confused
about what these minimum version requirements are trying to
accomplish. If we just want some distro to update some package, then
filing a bug report seems like a more polite approach than forming a
whole new "pylab system definition" :-).


More information about the SciPy-User mailing list