On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM, William Stein<[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Kurt Smith<[email protected]> wrote: >> I think its best that fwrap be its own package, distributed separately >> from Cython. That was the vibe I got from those at the SciPy 2009 >> conference and from the recent thread on Fwrap's licensing. The added >> benefit is that fwrap won't weigh Cython down w.r.t. licensing issues >> or be an impediment to Cython's acceptance into the Python std. lib. >> >> Presuming that everyone here agrees with the above (or doesn't care), >> the remaining question is where to host it. Since fwrap is still >> closely linked to Cython, I think a natural spot for the mercurial >> repo would be on Cython's servers. No strong feelings here -- I'm >> just as happy putting it on bitbucket. Fwrap would *not* clutter up >> Cython's trac, or Cython's wiki. These would be elsewhere. >> > > As the own of Cython's servers, I hereby certainly offer you hosting space.
Thanks! I'm evaluating bitbucket & googlecode to see what they offer -- apparently googlecode has mercurial support, so that is a big plus. I'll decide soon & let you know. Kurt > > -- William > _______________________________________________ > Cython-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev > _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
