On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate of
NumPy 1.6.2. This is a maintenance release. Due to the delay of the NumPy
1.7.0, this release contains far more fixes than a regular
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and explain
the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've done an
amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views and suggesting
ways forward in a mutually respectful manner. This
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Sandro Tosi matrixh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate
of
NumPy 1.6.2. This is a maintenance release. Due to
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Sandro Tosi matrixh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm pleased to announce the availability of the
This news did not arrive at scikit-learn-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net
Is above list deprecated?
BTW thanks for supporting and working on this project ;)
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Gael Varoquaux
gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org wrote:
On behalf of Andy Mueller, our release manager, I am
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.iowrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Please test this release and report any issues on the numpy-discussion
mailing list.
I think it's probably nice not to ship pyc in the source tarball:
$ find numpy-1.6.2rc1/ -name *.pyc
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.iowrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating
On May 9, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've done
an
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
On May 9, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.iowrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the
My three proposals:
* do nothing and leave things as is
* add a global flag that turns off masked array support by default but
otherwise leaves things unchanged (I'm still unclear how this would work
exactly)
* move Mark's masked ndarray objects into a new
Mark will you give more details about this proposal?How would the flag
work, what would it modify?
The idea is inspired in part by the Chrome release cycle, which has a
presentation here:
https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dg63dpc6_4d7vkk6chpli=1
Some quotes:
Features
On 05/09/2012 06:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views
and suggesting ways
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
My three proposals:
* do nothing and leave things as is
* add a global flag that turns off masked array support by default but
otherwise leaves things unchanged (I'm still unclear how this would work
exactly)
*
We considered lowering the review standard near the end of my direct
involvement in the doc project but decided not to. You didn't mention
any benefit to the proposed changes, so while I'm not active in the doc
project anymore, let me relate our decision.
It's often the case that docstrings get
On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
1) This wrap-up discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
such a way that we don't tie our hands in the future.I do not believe we
can figure out what to do for masked arrays in one short week. What happens
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating
Hi,
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote:
On 05/09/2012 06:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 06:55:12PM +0200, klo uo wrote:
This news did not arrive at scikit-learn-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net
Is above list deprecated?
Andy Mueller did the announcement on the scikit-learn mailing list.
BTW thanks for supporting and working on this project ;)
Thank you very
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
1) This wrap-up discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
such a way that we don't tie our hands in the future.I do not believe
we can figure out
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Paul Ivanov pivanov...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.iowrote:
On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
1) This wrap-up discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
such a way that we
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Sandro Tosi matrixh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Please test this release and report any issues on the numpy-discussion
mailing list.
I think it's probably nice not to ship pyc in the
On 05/10/2012 01:01 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote:
On 05/09/2012 06:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
explain the current
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote:
Sorry everyone for being so dense and contaminating that other thread.
Here's a new thread where I can respond to Nathaniel's response.
On 05/10/2012 01:08 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
Hi Dag,
On
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
My only objection to this proposal is that committing to this approach
seems premature. The existing masked array objects act quite
differently from numpy.ma, so why do
25 matches
Mail list logo
