https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/milestones/0.5.0
On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 5:38:42 PM UTC-5, Jeff Bezanson wrote: > > The 0.5.0 milestone on github does in fact reflect our best > understanding of what's in the release. Perhaps there is a > presentation or UI problem here, but fundamentally I don't see why a > list of issues wouldn't work for this. One problem seems to be that > people too often add fairly minor items to the 0.5.0 milestone, so > randomly-chosen bugs get mixed in. Anything that could be addressed in > a point release should be in the 0.5.x milestone. > > I think it could help if everybody actively critiques the milestone > issues, instead of looking at it and just concluding the list is junk. > For example, comment "this looks like a small bug, please move to > 0.5.x", or "is anybody working on this?" etc. > > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Jeffrey Sarnoff > <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > With the ability to add methods to an abstract type, so we do not lose > that > > important capability; makes sense to me. > > > > On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 2:14:27 PM UTC-5, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > >> > >> The sticking point has been the decision – which seemed to have already > >> been made as of last summer – about whether slices should be views or > not. > >> There has been fierce debate about that and no apparent consensus. Part > of > >> the problem is that we do not yet have all of the compiler support > required > >> to fully evaluate the potential performance of array views: we still > need to > >> heap allocate any object which refers to heap allocated objects, which > means > >> that we cannot stack allocate array views and the compiler cannot do > much to > >> optimize them. > >> > >> At this point, I'm inclined to wrap up the rest of the array changes, > >> including the one that Scott brings up and start the RC phase for 0.5. > That > >> would leave the array view change as a future potential change. > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:36 PM, David Anthoff <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> At some point in the summer there was communication from the core team > >>> that v0.5 would be a short release cycle that was all about the > >>> arraypocalypse theme. My sense is that this original plan is off the > table, > >>> and that (as John said) there is no new time plan to replace the > original > >>> one, or at least none has been communicated from the core at this > point. > >>> Take this info with a grain of salt, I’m largely reading tea-leaves > here :) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > >>> Behalf Of John Myles White > >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 10:17 AM > >>> To: julia-users <[email protected]> > >>> Subject: [julia-users] Re: What to read to understand finishing v0.5? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I think it's fair to say that the reason your questions aren't already > >>> answered by GitHub is because there's no one who's made an executive > >>> decision about the answers to those questions. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- John > >>> > >>> On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 4:44:28 AM UTC-8, Andreas Lobinger > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello colleagues, > >>> > >>> i need a bigger picture of the status of v0.5, dates, timelines, > missing > >>> features, missing testing, expected closing. Just go to github and > select > >>> the v0.5 milestone gives me a diverse picture. > >>> > >>> Wishing ahappy day, > >>> Andreas > >> > >> > > >
