On Mon, 2024-05-06 at 09:17 +1000, Matti Picus wrote: > On 05/05/2024 11:32, Mark Harfouche wrote: > <snip> > > > > Thank you for considering this last minute request. I know it adds > > work at this stage. > > > > Mark > > > I think NumPy should not be the leader in dropping versions, rather > should be one of the more conservative packages since other packages > depend on it. We have indeed dropped 3.9 on HEAD, and will not be > supporting it for 2.1, but to me it makes sense to support it for the > large 2.0 release.
I think it is late anyway and NumPy always had a slightly longer support period and that seemed fine especially since NumPy is low in the stack. The SPEC was written to give the community that precedence and show that many agree with you (and numpy endorses it). Maybe the "endorsed by" list should rather be grown to strengthen the argument instead? (Of course there are true exceptions, IIRC scikit-learn chooses to have much longer support windows.) - Sebastian > > > Matti > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ > Member address: sebast...@sipsolutions.net > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
