Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.0b2 released

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Julian Taylor < jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 01/30/2016 06:27 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith > > wrote: > > > > It occurs to me that the best

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy pull requests getting out of hand.

I don't like that approach, closing PRs with valuable code causes them to get lost in the much larger set of closed ones. Instead we could tag them appropriately so they can be found by parties interested in using or finishing them. These could also be used for new contributors to work on. You

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.0b2 released

hi, even if it are good changes, I find it reasonable to ask for a delay in numpy release if you need more time to adapt. Of course this has to be within reason and can be rejected, but its very valuable to know changes break existing old workarounds. If pyfits broke there is probably a lot more

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.0b1 is out

> On 31 Jan 2016, at 9:48 am, Sebastian Berg wrote: > > On Sa, 2016-01-30 at 20:27 +0100, Derek Homeier wrote: >> On 27 Jan 2016, at 1:10 pm, Sebastian Berg < >> sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote: >>> >>> On Mi, 2016-01-27 at 11:19 +, Nadav Horesh wrote:

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy pull requests getting out of hand.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 11:22 PM, Julian Taylor wrote: > I don't like that approach, closing PRs with valuable code causes them > to get lost in the much larger set of closed ones. > Instead we could tag them appropriately so they can be found by > parties interested