On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:29 AM, James A. Bednar wrote:
> | Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:32:22 -0700
> | From: Charles R Harris
> |
> | On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> |
> | > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> | >
> | > > Hey all,
> | > >
> |
| Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:32:22 -0700
| From: Charles R Harris
|
| On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
|
| > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant
wrote:
| >
| > > Hey all,
| > >
| > > What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one
| > > f
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
> On Thursday, January 27, 2011, Christopher Barker
> wrote:
>> On 1/27/11 3:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>>
> What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
> development discussions and one for user discussions
On Thursday, January 27, 2011, Christopher Barker wrote:
> On 1/27/11 3:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one for user discussions)?
>
> Speaking as someone who hasn't contributed code to numpy
On 1/27/11 3:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>>> What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
>>> development discussions and one for user discussions)?
Speaking as someone who hasn't contributed code to numpy itself, I still
really like to follow the development discussion,
On 1/27/2011 5:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> I think for me, the trouble is I don't have time to read all the
> messages, but I want to see developer-centric discussions. Sometimes, I
> can tell that from the subject (but I miss it).
>
> I agree that traffic is probably not too heavy at this poin
On 28/01/2011 1:07 p.m., Sturla Molden wrote:
> Den 28.01.2011 00:23, skrev Robert Kern:
>> We've resisted it for years. I don't think the split has done scipy
>> much good.
> The scope of NumPy is narrower development-wise and wider user-wise.
> While SciPy does not benefit, as use and development
Den 28.01.2011 00:23, skrev Robert Kern:
> We've resisted it for years. I don't think the split has done scipy
> much good.
The scope of NumPy is narrower development-wise and wider user-wise.
While SciPy does not benefit, as use and development are still quite
entangled, this is not be the case
I think for me, the trouble is I don't have time to read all the messages, but
I want to see developer-centric discussions. Sometimes, I can tell that from
the subject (but I miss it).
I agree that traffic is probably not too heavy at this point (but it does
create some difficulty in keepi
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
> development discussions and one for user discussions)?
>
> We've resisted it for years. I do
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
> development discussions and one for user discussions)?
>
> We've resisted it for years. I do
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
> development discussions and one for user discussions)?
We've resisted it for years. I don't think the split has done scipy
much good. But that may just be m
Hey all,
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for development
discussions and one for user discussions)?
-Travis
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-dis
13 matches
Mail list logo
