On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Ralf Gommers <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi all, > > Building binaries for releases is currently quite complex and > time-consuming. For OS X we need two different machines, because we still > provide binaries for OS X 10.5 and PPC machines. I propose to not do this > anymore. It doesn't mean we completely drop support for 10.5 and PPC, just > that we don't produce binaries. PPC was phased out in 2006 and OS X 10.6 > came out in 2009, so there can't be a lot of demand for it (and the > download stats at > http://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.1/confirm this). > > Furthermore I propose to not provide 2.6 binaries anymore. Downloads of > 2.6 OS X binaries were <5% of the 2.7 ones. We did the same with 2.4 for a > long time - support it but no binaries. > > So what we'd have left at the moment is only the 64-bit/32-bit universal > binary for 10.6 and up. What we finally need to add is 3.x OS X binaries. > We can make an attempt to build these on 10.8 - since we have access to a > hosted 10.8 Mac Mini it would allow all devs to easily do a release > (leaving aside the Windows issue). If anyone has tried the 10.6 SDK on 10.8 > and knows if it actually works, that would be helpful. > I am not sure one can use 10.6 SDK on 10.8 ? I am actually looking into those issues for our mac support at Enthought Are you here for euroscipy ? David > > Any concerns, objections? > > Cheers, > Ralf > > P.S. the same proposal applies of course also to scipy > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
