Hi, On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Charles R Harris >> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Charles R Harris >> >> > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm thinking of making the 1.8.x branch next Sunday. Any complaints, >> >> >> thoughts? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > First thought: thanks a lot for doing this. >> >> >> >> I'm afraid I don't understand the discussion on timezones in >> >> datetime64, but I have the impression that those who do think it needs >> >> an urgent decision and some action for the short term. Is that right, >> >> datetimers? >> >> >> >> If that's so, and there are worthwhile changes that are practical in >> >> the next few weeks, it seems reasonable to wait. >> >> >> > >> > My impression is that we will have something for 1.9. If it comes in for >> > 1.8, fine. But I think it is still under development. Hopefully the 1.9 >> > release will come out next spring. >> >> OK - then I guess you are saying it is up you, our datetimer friends, >> to make a proposal and timetable and implementation, if y'all think it >> can be done in the next few weeks, > > > My impression: there's a reasonable amount of agreement on what has to be > done, but no one has stepped up to do the work. It doesn't look like > something that should block a release, because there's not a huge amount of > interest and the API is already labeled 'experimental'. So I don't really > see an issue in releasing 1.8 with the same behavior as 1.7.
Chris B - are you the point man on this one? What do you think? Cheers, Matthew _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
