On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Darren Dale <dsdal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Travis Oliphant <oliph...@enthought.com> > wrote: > > I will just work on trunk and assume that the next release will be ABI > > incompatible. At this point I would rather call the next version 1.5 > > than 2.0, though. When the date-time work is completed, then we could > > release an ABI-compatible-with-1.5 version 2.0. > > There may be repercussions if numpy starts deviating from its own > conventions for what versions may introduce ABI incompatibilities. > > I attended a workshop recently where a number of scientists approached > me and expressed interest in switching from IDL to python. Two of > these were senior scientists leading large research groups and > collaborations, both of whom had looked at python several years ago > and decided they did not like "the wild west nature" (direct quote) of > the scientific python community. I assured them that both the projects > and community were maturing. At the time, I did not have to explain > the situation concerning numpy-1.4.0, which, if it causes problems > when they try to set up an environment to assess python, could put > them off python for another 3 years, maybe even for good. It would be > a lot easier to justify the disruption if one could say "numpy-2.0 > added support for some important features, so this disruption was > unfortunate but necessary. Such disruptions are specified by major > version changes, which as you can see are rare. In fact, there are no > further major version changes envisioned at this time." That kind of > statement might reassure a lot of people, including package > maintainers etc. > > Regards, > Darren > > P.S. I promise this will be my last post on the subject. > Don't be shy ;) You make good points and I agree with them. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
