On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Gael Varoquaux
> wrote:
> > Next time I see you, I owe you a beer for making you cross :).
>
> If I curse at you, will I get a beer too?
>
Wow! This is taking a very Pavlovian turn...
Be Well
Anthony
>
>
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Gael Varoquaux
wrote:
> Next time I see you, I owe you a beer for making you cross :).
If I curse at you, will I get a beer too?
-Chris
--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer
Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R(206) 526-6959 voice
76
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> If the behaviour is not specified and tested, there is no guarantee that it
> will continue.
This is an open-source project - there is no guarantee of ANYTHING.
But that being said, the specification and testing of numpy is quite
weak --
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 03:09:08PM -0700, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> Chuck, Gael, here is my todo list for the 1.7.0 release:
> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/396
I have created issues and mentionned them in the comments on your issue.
Cheers,
Gaël
___
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Gael Varoquaux
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 07:37:35PM -0600, Charles R Harris wrote:
>> +1, I think we should endeavor to have a respectful and welcoming
>> community.
>
>> With a bit of humour now and then among the old timers, no? Look, I've been
>>
Hi Nathaniel,
First of all, thanks for your investment in numpy. You have really been
moving the project forward lately.
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 03:03:01AM +0100, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > I have just fixed a fairly nasty bug in scikit-learn that was
> > introduced by change of semantics in orde
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 07:37:35PM -0600, Charles R Harris wrote:
> +1, I think we should endeavor to have a respectful and welcoming
> community.
> With a bit of humour now and then among the old timers, no? Look, I've been
> outright insulted on the list and I don't recall anyone weighin
> >
> > >From a practical standpoint, I believe that people implementing large
> > changes to the numpy codebase, or any other core scipy package, should
> > think really hard about their impact. I do realise that the changes are
> > discussed on the mailing lists, but there is a lot of activity to
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Gael Varoquaux <
gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> Hi numpy developers,
>
> First of all, thanks a lot for the hard work you put in numpy. I know
> very well that maintaining such a core library is a lot of effort and a
> service to the community. But "with g
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Anthony Scopatz wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>> > Bitch, bitch, bitch. Look, I know you are pissed and venting a bit, but
>> this
>> > problem could have been dete
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > Bitch, bitch, bitch. Look, I know you are pissed and venting a bit, but
> this
> > problem could have been detected and reported 6 months ago, that is,
> unless
> > it is new du
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > Bitch, bitch, bitch. Look, I know you are pissed and venting a bit, but
> this
> > problem could have been detected and reported 6 months ago, that is,
> unless
> > it is new du
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> Bitch, bitch, bitch. Look, I know you are pissed and venting a bit, but this
> problem could have been detected and reported 6 months ago, that is, unless
> it is new due to development on your end.
It would be great if we could keep thes
Gael puts in a plea for backward compatibility; I totally agree.
Numpy sometimes goes out of its way to make this hard. For example, when the
syntax of histogram were changed you got a nice DepreciationWarning about an
option to switch to the new behaviour; great. But a few releases later tha
On Sep 28, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 16:43 -0500, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> I agree that we should be much more cautious about semantic changes in
>> the 1.X series of NumPy.How we handle situations where 1.6 changed
>> things from 1.5 and wasn't reporte
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Gael Varoquaux <
gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> Hi numpy developers,
>
> First of all, thanks a lot for the hard work you put in numpy. I know
> very well that maintaining such a core library is a lot of effort and a
> service to the community. But "with g
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 16:43 -0500, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> I agree that we should be much more cautious about semantic changes in
> the 1.X series of NumPy.How we handle situations where 1.6 changed
> things from 1.5 and wasn't reported until now is an open question and
> depends on the partic
Thank you for expressing this voice, Gael.It is an important perspective.
The main reason that 1.7 has taken so long to get released is because I'm
concerned about these kinds of changes and really want to either remove them or
put in adequate warnings prior to moving forward.
It's a lon
Hi numpy developers,
First of all, thanks a lot for the hard work you put in numpy. I know
very well that maintaining such a core library is a lot of effort and a
service to the community. But "with great dedication, comes great
responsibility" :).
I find that Numpy is a bit of a wild horse, a mo
19 matches
Mail list logo
