On Wed, 06 Feb 2019, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
...
> = ERRORS
> ==
> _ ERROR collecting
> tests/indexes/datetimes/test_tools.py __
>
any clues on this odd thing? https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/issues/25197
(citing here verbatim and entirely)
While updating debian package for pandas 0.24.1 running into this odd error
with pytest during collection. Just wondered if someone might have an
immediate clue so I don't waste
On Wed, 06 Feb 2019, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Yaroslav Halchenko writes:
> >> And it also does not solve the problem that updating can introduce
> >> regressions in reverse dependencies, which is not the best thing we can
> >> do just before freeze. But finally you are the maintainer, if you
Yaroslav Halchenko writes:
>> And it also does not solve the problem that updating can introduce
>> regressions in reverse dependencies, which is not the best thing we can
>> do just before freeze. But finally you are the maintainer, if you think
>> that updating is the way to go, just do it ;-)
On Wed, 06 Feb 2019, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Yaroslav Halchenko writes:
> > On Tue, 05 Feb 2019, Ole Streicher wrote:
> >> "Rebecca N. Palmer" writes:
> >> > Has anyone checked whether this would break pandas' reverse dependencies?
> >> I didn't yet. I just tried to update the packaging to
Yaroslav Halchenko writes:
> On Tue, 05 Feb 2019, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> "Rebecca N. Palmer" writes:
>> > Has anyone checked whether this would break pandas' reverse dependencies?
>
>> I didn't yet. I just tried to update the packaging to 0.24, which
>> however has a number of test failures,
HI Yaroslav,
On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 02:07:52PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> otherwise, I would wholeheartedly welcome simplifications as long as
> pandas builds seamlessly also at least on debian stable (or soon
> oldstable) and some recent ubuntus.
Supporting Stretch (=stable and soon
On Tue, 05 Feb 2019, Ole Streicher wrote:
> "Rebecca N. Palmer" writes:
> > Has anyone checked whether this would break pandas' reverse dependencies?
> I didn't yet. I just tried to update the packaging to 0.24, which
> however has a number of test failures, which would need to be discussed
>
On Tue, 05 Feb 2019, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 08:48:09AM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > On a longer term, it would be good to clean this package up (removing
> > f.e. the special Cython handling) -- Yaroslav, how much do you still
> > these things? Since Panda is one of
On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 08:48:09AM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
>
> On a longer term, it would be good to clean this package up (removing
> f.e. the special Cython handling) -- Yaroslav, how much do you still
> these things? Since Panda is one of the universal packages, it would be
> good to have
"Rebecca N. Palmer" writes:
> Has anyone checked whether this would break pandas' reverse dependencies?
I didn't yet. I just tried to update the packaging to 0.24, which
however has a number of test failures, which would need to be discussed
with upstream first.
Also, the package is a bit
Control: tags -1 fixed-upstream patch
The test failure is that np.array @ pd.DataFrame (matrix product) tries
to keep both the DataFrame's indices, which fails because the new matrix
is a different shape.
This appears to be fixed in 0.24.1 from PyPI, but as previously noted,
this is a new
Has anyone checked whether this would break pandas' reverse dependencies?
Hi Ole,
On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 08:54:26AM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
> the Debian "pandas" package, which is maintained by you, FTBFS since
> some time due to an incompatibility with numpy 1.16 (RC bug #918206).
>
> And there is a new Pandas version 0.24 out since a week, which however
> seems
14 matches
Mail list logo
