On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 6:56 AM, Ralf Gommers <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Charles R Harris < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> It is time to start looking forward to the 1.9.0 release. Currently there >> are some 76 open PRs and they keep rolling in, which is good, >> > > To make the PR list a bit more manageable, I would suggest to start > closing the ones which are not in a state to get merged and haven't seen > activity by the author for >3 months. And add in the dev guide that this is > normal policy and that authors are free to reopen the PR when they continue > working on it. > I'd feel better about doing that if PR's were reviewed and dealt with on a regular basis, but we aren't quite there yet. That said, I'd like to keep the number down in the 30-40 range. > > but we need to decide on what is important for 1.9 and what can be put off >> to 1.10 because otherwise we will never finish. The datetime problems and >> some of the deprecations/futurewarnings that were present in 1.8 need to be >> dealt with. The nanmedian stuff will make a nice addition to the nan >> functions. Apart from those, if you have a PR or fix that you think needs >> to be in 1.9, please make it known. >> > > The boolean subtract and ellipsis indexing deprecations probably need > reconsidering. I get 78 test errors right now because of those if I test > scipy master against numpy master. > > That's a lot of errors. Do you think they should be reverted permanently or just for 1.9? Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
