On 01/15/2016 05:19 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Steve Waterbury
<water...@pangalactic.us> wrote:
On 01/15/2016 05:07 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
I attribute
some of the conda-ignoring to "NIH" and, to some extent,
possibly defensiveness (I would be defensive too if I had been
working on pip as long as they had when conda came along ;).
I must say, I don't personally recognize those reasons. For example,
I hadn't worked on pip at all before conda came along.
By "working on pip", I was referring to *developers* of pip,
not those who *use* pip for packaging things. Are you
contributing to the development of pip, or merely using it
for creating packages?
Sorry - I assumed you were taking about us here on the list planning
to build Linux and Windows wheels.
No, I was definitely *not* talking about those on the list
planning to build Linux and Windows wheels when I referred to
the folks "working on pip". However, that said, I *completely*
agree with Travis's remark:
"The other very real downside is that these efforts to promote
numpy as wheels further encourages people to not use the
better solution that already exists in conda."
> It certainly doesn't seem surprising to me that the pip developers
> would continue to develop pip rather than switch to conda. Has there
> been any attempt to persuade the pip developers to do this?
Not that I know of, but as I said, I have asked pip developers and
core python developers for their opinions on conda, and my
impression has always been one of, shall we say, a circling of the
wagons. Yes, even the nice guys in the python community (and I've
know some of them a *long* time) sometimes do that ... ;)
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
