Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Travis Oliphant
On Apr 30, 2012, at 10:14 PM, Jason Grout wrote: > On 4/30/12 6:31 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: >> Hey all, >> >> We have been doing some investigation of various approaches to issue >> tracking. The last time the conversation left this list was with Ralf's >> current list of preferences as

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Charles R Harris
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > >> >> >>> The same is true of SciPy.I think if SciPy also migrates to use >>> Github issues, then together with IPython we can really be a voice that >>> helps Github. I

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Charles R Harris
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > > >> The same is true of SciPy.I think if SciPy also migrates to use >> Github issues, then together with IPython we can really be a voice that >> helps Github. I will propose to NumFOCUS that the Foundation sponsor >> migration of t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.6.2 release - backports and MSVC testing help

2012-04-30 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > > > On 4/30/2012 1:16 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Charles has done a great job of backporting a lot of bug fixes to 1.6.2, > > see PRs 260, 261, 262 and 263. For those who are interested, please have > > a look at those PRs

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Travis Oliphant
> > The same is true of SciPy.I think if SciPy also migrates to use Github > issues, then together with IPython we can really be a voice that helps > Github. I will propose to NumFOCUS that the Foundation sponsor migration of > the Trac to Github for NumPy and SciPy.If anyone would l

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Charles R Harris
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > Hey all, > > We have been doing some investigation of various approaches to issue > tracking. The last time the conversation left this list was with > Ralf's current list of preferences as: > > 1) Redmine > 2) Trac > 3) Github > > Sinc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Benjamin Root
On Monday, April 30, 2012, Travis Oliphant wrote: > Hey all, > > We have been doing some investigation of various approaches to issue > tracking. The last time the conversation left this list was with > Ralf's current list of preferences as: > > 1) Redmine > 2) Trac > 3) Github > > Since that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Jason Grout
On 4/30/12 6:31 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > Hey all, > > We have been doing some investigation of various approaches to issue > tracking. The last time the conversation left this list was with Ralf's > current list of preferences as: > > 1) Redmine > 2) Trac > 3) Github > > Since that time,

[Numpy-discussion] SciPy 2012 Abstract and Tutorial Deadlines Extended

2012-04-30 Thread Warren Weckesser
SciPy 2012 Conference Deadlines Extended Didn't quite finish your abstract or tutorial yet? Good news: the SciPy 2012 organizers have extended the deadline until Friday, May 4. Proposals for tutorials and abstracts for talks and posters are now due by midnight (Austin time, CDT), May 4. For the

[Numpy-discussion] Continuous Integration

2012-04-30 Thread Travis Oliphant
Hello all, NumFOCUS has been working with Continuum Analytics and multiple people in the community on Continuous Integration services for NumPy. Right now the tools we are using are: TeamCity ShiningPandas One great thing about Continuous Integration is that you don't have

[Numpy-discussion] Issue Tracking

2012-04-30 Thread Travis Oliphant
Hey all, We have been doing some investigation of various approaches to issue tracking. The last time the conversation left this list was with Ralf's current list of preferences as: 1) Redmine 2) Trac 3) Github Since that time, Maggie who has been doing a lot of work settting up various

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.6.2 release - backports and MSVC testing help

2012-04-30 Thread Christoph Gohlke
On 4/30/2012 1:16 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > Hi all, > > Charles has done a great job of backporting a lot of bug fixes to 1.6.2, > see PRs 260, 261, 262 and 263. For those who are interested, please have > a look at those PRs to see and comment on what's proposed to go into 1.6.2. > > I also have

Re: [Numpy-discussion] datetime dtype possible regression

2012-04-30 Thread Mark Wiebe
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > >> I've done some comparisons of 1.6.1 and 1.7 (master), and written up some >> key differences in a pull request here: >> >> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/264/files#diff-0 >

[Numpy-discussion] Euroscipy 2012 deadline extension: May 7th

2012-04-30 Thread Emmanuelle Gouillart
The committee of the Euroscipy 2012 conference has extended the deadline for abstract submission to **Monday May 7th, midnight** (Brussels time). Up to then, new abstracts may be submitted on http://www.euroscipy.org/conference/euroscipy2012, and already-submitted abstracts can be modified. We

Re: [Numpy-discussion] datetime dtype possible regression

2012-04-30 Thread Charles R Harris
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > I've done some comparisons of 1.6.1 and 1.7 (master), and written up some > key differences in a pull request here: > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/264/files#diff-0 > > What you've discovered here looks like an interaction between the >

[Numpy-discussion] 1.6.2 release - backports and MSVC testing help

2012-04-30 Thread Ralf Gommers
Hi all, Charles has done a great job of backporting a lot of bug fixes to 1.6.2, see PRs 260, 261, 262 and 263. For those who are interested, please have a look at those PRs to see and comment on what's proposed to go into 1.6.2. I also have a request for help with testing: can someone who uses M

Re: [Numpy-discussion] datetime dtype possible regression

2012-04-30 Thread Mark Wiebe
I've done some comparisons of 1.6.1 and 1.7 (master), and written up some key differences in a pull request here: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/264/files#diff-0 What you've discovered here looks like an interaction between the automatic unit detection and struct dtypes, it's a bug to do wit

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Alternative to R phyper

2012-04-30 Thread josef . pktd
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:09, Bruno Santos wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> I have a bit of code where I am using rpy2 to import R phyper so I can >> perform an hypergeometric test. Unfortunately our cluster does not have a >> functional insta

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Alternative to R phyper

2012-04-30 Thread Robert Kern
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:09, Bruno Santos wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I have a bit of code where I am using rpy2 to import R phyper so I can > perform an hypergeometric test. Unfortunately our cluster does not have a > functional installation of rpy2 working. So I am wondering if I could > tran

[Numpy-discussion] Alternative to R phyper

2012-04-30 Thread Bruno Santos
Hello everyone, I have a bit of code where I am using rpy2 to import R phyper so I can perform an hypergeometric test. Unfortunately our cluster does not have a functional installation of rpy2 working. So I am wondering if I could translate to scipy which would make the code completly independent