Neal Becker, 28.08.2012 18:42:
> Neal Becker wrote:
>
>> All built/tested OK on fedora (devel).
>>
>> Build log is here:
>> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8252/4428252/build.log
>>
>> Should I be concerened about these excluded tests?
>>
>> Ran 6865 tests in 1601.636s
>> OK
>> Follo
Yaroslav Halchenko, 02.08.2012 21:54:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> just a side-note -- I didn't know that StrictVersion doesn't play nicely
>>> with LooseVersion to any degree:
>
>>> $> python -c 'from distutils.version import LooseVersion as LV,
>>> StrictVersion as SV; print
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> > just a side-note -- I didn't know that StrictVersion doesn't play nicely
> > with LooseVersion to any degree:
> > $> python -c 'from distutils.version import LooseVersion as LV,
> > StrictVersion as SV; print SV("0.17") > LV("0.18")'
> > True
> >
Yaroslav Halchenko, 02.08.2012 19:02:
> just a side-note -- I didn't know that StrictVersion doesn't play nicely with
> LooseVersion to any degree:
>
> $> python -c 'from distutils.version import LooseVersion as LV, StrictVersion
> as SV; print SV("0.17") > LV("0.18")'
> True
>
> at least in p
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Bradley M. Froehle, 01.08.2012 18:35:
> > Yes, this versioning has also impacted mpi4py which had to add some pretty
> > ugly code in setup.py to work around it:
> > https://code.google.com/p/mpi4py/source/detail?r=841e9df
> >> I am not sure what is
Bradley M. Froehle, 01.08.2012 18:35:
> Yes, this versioning has also impacted mpi4py which had to add some pretty
> ugly code in setup.py to work around it:
>
> https://code.google.com/p/mpi4py/source/detail?r=841e9df
>
>> I am not sure what is the status on PEP 386 [1] (not yet adopted afaik)
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012, mark florisson wrote:
> Thanks for the fix. I also pushed a fix for one more test numpy_test
> related to fused types dispatching. That passes all tests for me on 32
> bit linux.
> > Yaroslav, could you give it a try on the Debian build servers?
FWIW -- 0.16rc1-550-g8880c78
On 31 July 2012 20:14, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 31.07.2012 19:24:
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimenta
Yes, this versioning has also impacted mpi4py which had to add some pretty ugly
code in setup.py to work around it:
https://code.google.com/p/mpi4py/source/detail?r=841e9df
-Brad
> NB I am not sure what is the status on PEP 386 [1] (not yet adopted
> afaik) but it might be worthwhile following i
minor note -- could someone push the tag (annotated or signed
preferably) for 0.17rc1?
NB I am not sure what is the status on PEP 386 [1] (not yet adopted
afaik) but it might be worthwhile following it and/or existing
disutils.version.StrictVersion since having
In [2]: Cython.__version__
Out[2]:
ok, the output of running
OPT="-g -O0" /usr/bin/python runtests.py -vv --no-cleanup 2>&1 | tee
../0.16rc1-547-g68811fa-tests-output.txt
on a cleaned git repository on an s390x boiling down to
Ran 6891 tests in 1098.734s
FAILED (failures=42, errors=2)
is at
http://www.onerussian.com/tmp/0.16
sorry about the delay -- was not monitoring the ML tight enough ;)
So it is the
commit 8443607d7dffc7c8443d70036e0cce6aaa9c26e2
Author: Stefan Behnel
Date: Tue Jul 31 21:49:20 2012 +0200
determine buffer typegroup of integer dtypes based on signedness at C
compile time
...
I pulled curre
Robert Bradshaw, 31.07.2012 19:24:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
>>> On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
package for Cython 0.17.beta1 --
>>>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
>> On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
>>> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
>>> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 -- http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cython.html
mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
> On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
>> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
>> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 -- http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cython.html
>>
>> However, the builds are showing a lot of test failures
On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 -- http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cython.html
>
> However, the builds are showing a lot of test failures on non-amd64 sytems.
> See https://bui
Hey,
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:35 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey Matthew,
>
> Seriously, no problem, we're still getting stuff in there, no need to
> hurry. If you're in Cuba it sounds like you have better stuff to do
> than improve Cython's documentation :) Not to discourage contributors,
> but
Hey Matthew,
Seriously, no problem, we're still getting stuff in there, no need to
hurry. If you're in Cuba it sounds like you have better stuff to do
than improve Cython's documentation :) Not to discourage contributors,
but I would really enjoy Cuba here :). I'm working on my gsoc now, so
making
Pushed my change.
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 23 May 2012 12:31, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:08 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functi
Hi,
For the promised memoryview doc edits:
Sorry - I'm in Cuba - not much internet. I will push something for
review by Friday, but please go ahead without me if that's not fast
enough. Sorry to be the blocker,
Best,
Matthew
On 5/23/12, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For the promised memor
Hi,
For the promised memoryview doc edits:
Sorry - I'm in Cuba - not much internet. I will push something for
review by Friday, but please go ahead without me if that's not fast
enough. Sorry to be the blocker,
Best,
Matthew
On 5/23/12, mark florisson wrote:
> On 23 May 2012 12:31, Robert
On 23 May 2012 12:31, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:08 AM, mark florisson
> wrote:
>> On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will b
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:08 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would b
On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy support works, wh
mark florisson, 06.05.2012 16:28:
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy support works, what works and what d
Stefan Behnel, 06.05.2012 20:22:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 06.05.2012 19:51:
>> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>>> for a 0.17 release? I th
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 07.05.2012 18:19:
>> On 7 May 2012 17:04, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>> Hmm, it seems to me that master is currently broken:
>>>
>>> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/job/cython-devel-tests/BACKEND=c,PYVERSION=py27-ext/
mark florisson, 07.05.2012 18:19:
> On 7 May 2012 17:04, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>> Hmm, it seems to me that master is currently broken:
>>
>> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/job/cython-devel-tests/BACKEND=c,PYVERSION=py27-ext/
>>
> Quite broken, in fact :) It doesn't ever print error mes
On 7 May 2012 17:04, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/5/7 mark florisson :
>> On 6 May 2012 20:41, Matthew Brett wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
>>> wrote:
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
after merging
2012/5/7 mark florisson :
> On 6 May 2012 20:41, Matthew Brett wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good ti
On 6 May 2012 20:41, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
> wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it
Hi,
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy s
On 6 May 2012 19:38, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 06.05.2012 16:28:
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
>>
On 6 May 2012 19:29, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn :
>> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>>> for a
mark florisson, 06.05.2012 16:28:
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy support works, what works and what d
2012/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn :
> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also docu
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 06.05.2012 19:51:
> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document t
On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
extent pypy support works, what work
38 matches
Mail list logo
