On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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. Well, it's only "urgent" in the sense that there are indeed a couple small changes that would really help, and if we don't use a release to motivate us, when will we it ever get done? But it'll still take someone to do it -- I'm afraid it's out of my depth to do so. There is a chance that Mark W. or Travis O. could do it, but it does seem unlikely that they'll find the time in the next week or two, so I guess we'll put it off, and keep the "experimental" label on there. >> My impression is that we will have something for 1.9. If it comes in for >> 1.8, fine. I sure hope we can at least get the "rip out the ugly default I/O TZ behavior" fix in time for 1.9. Whether something more ambitious can be done, we'll have to see. > 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, Yup -- if anyone wants to pipe up and offer to do it, speak now or forever hold your piece. -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion