On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 August 2016 at 19:17, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Nelle Varoquaux < > nelle.varoqu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 9 August 2016 at 17:28, Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.s...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > @Emmanuelle I'm probably among the ones pushing hardest for this, and > I > >> > can > >> > tell you, I can't wait for this change in policy, and would be sorely > >> > disappointed by having to work in an experimental branch of > >> > scikit-image. > >> > Both @-matmul and keyword-only arguments are, imho, compelling reasons > >> > to > >> > switch. (Imagine the amount of fiddling with the API that we could do > >> > with > >> > keyword-only arguments, without the annoying deprecation cycle!) > >> > > >> > @Ralf I would argue in favour of 3.5, for the above reasons and > because > >> > anyone who had the temerity to update to 3.4 is very likely to > >> > subsequently > >> > move to 3.5. (Self-selected group of early adopters, plus no backwards > >> > incompatibility issues between the two versions.) > > > > > > I agree with this argument, I was just asking to clarify. @ is at least > > something interesting that's specifically added for scientific users, so > > imho 3.5 is the first 3.x release where in some cases the benefits may > start > > to be worth the costs. > > > >> > >> That implies that even ubuntu users will have to install python from > >> another source than the package manager. Do you really want this? That > >> means that only fairly advance python users will be able to use the > >> latest scikit-image release. > > > > > > In the grand scheme of things, does Ubuntu matter much for this decision? > > There are way more Windows and OS X users, so if it's OK for them (which > is > > not a given) then it should also be OK for those fewer and on average > more > > computer-literate Ubuntu users. > > I don't have a good overview of what OS people are using, but in the > different research facilities I've worked or visited, it was always > linux based, and users where not really tech-savy. I checked on all of > the servers (UW's genome science, the Curie institute, UC Berkeley's > stats department, the Mines' machine learning computing facilities.) I > have access to, none have python3.5. Some of these servers are > "offline", thus conda is useless. All of these research institutes > have teams that use in some way image processing. > > I'll just also mentionned that we had a keynote at scipy this year > mentionning she was using python because she just did not have the > time anymore to code in C++ and Java. These are the kind of people > that may be using scikit-image, that may be interested in the latest > version of the package, and yet just not have the time to compile > python3.5 from scratch on an outdated server. > Fair enough, but there are likely much more outdated servers with Python 2.7 than with Python 3.4 on them ..... Ralf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scikit-image" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scikit-image+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send an email to scikit-image@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scikit-image/CABL7CQjye5g5jppRk1hej2g2P3VCKa0mrcHe4Z9u37nSrqBpsg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
