Robert Kern schrieb: > Pierre GM wrote: >> Talking about that, what happened to these projects of modular installation >> of scipy ? Robert promised us last month to explain what went wrong with his >> approach, but never had the time... > > I created a module (scipy_subpackages.py, IIRC) next to setup.py that > essentially just served as a global configuration to inform all of the > setup.py's what subpackages they were supposed to build (mostly just > Lib/setup.py, actually). I then had a script run through the various > collections > of subpackages that I wanted to build, set the appropriate values in > scipy_subpackages, and run setup() with the appropriate parameters to build > an > egg for each collection. > > However, build/ apparently needs to be cleaned out between each egg, > otherwise > you contaminate later eggs. >
So, to put it "pointedly" (if that's the right word...?): Numpy should not get small functions from scipy -> because the size of scipy doesn't matter -> because scipy's modules will be installable as add-ons separately (and because there will be ready-to-use installers); however, nobody knows how to actually do that in practice ? <irony>Well that will convince my colleagues!</irony> Please don't feel offended, I just want to make the point (as usual) that this way numpy is going to be a good library for other software projects, but not super-attractive for direct users (aka "matlab converts", although I personally don't come from matlab). cheers, sven _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
