| Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:32:22 -0700
| From: Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
|
| On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:
|
| On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant teoliph...@gmail.com
wrote:
|
|Hey all,
|
|What is the
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:29 AM, James A. Bednar jbed...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
| Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:32:22 -0700
| From: Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
|
| On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:
|
| On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis
Hey all,
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for development
discussions and one for user discussions)?
-Travis
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant teoliph...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey all,
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one for user discussions)?
We've resisted it for years. I don't think the split has done scipy
much good. But
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant teoliph...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hey all,
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one for user discussions)?
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant teoliph...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hey all,
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one for user discussions)?
I think for me, the trouble is I don't have time to read all the messages, but
I want to see developer-centric discussions. Sometimes, I can tell that from
the subject (but I miss it).
I agree that traffic is probably not too heavy at this point (but it does
create some difficulty in
Den 28.01.2011 00:23, skrev Robert Kern:
We've resisted it for years. I don't think the split has done scipy
much good.
The scope of NumPy is narrower development-wise and wider user-wise.
While SciPy does not benefit, as use and development are still quite
entangled, this is not be the case
On 28/01/2011 1:07 p.m., Sturla Molden wrote:
Den 28.01.2011 00:23, skrev Robert Kern:
We've resisted it for years. I don't think the split has done scipy
much good.
The scope of NumPy is narrower development-wise and wider user-wise.
While SciPy does not benefit, as use and development are
On 1/27/2011 5:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
I think for me, the trouble is I don't have time to read all the
messages, but I want to see developer-centric discussions. Sometimes, I
can tell that from the subject (but I miss it).
I agree that traffic is probably not too heavy at this point
On 1/27/11 3:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one for user discussions)?
Speaking as someone who hasn't contributed code to numpy itself, I still
really like to follow the development discussion, so
On Thursday, January 27, 2011, Christopher Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov wrote:
On 1/27/11 3:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one for user discussions)?
Speaking as someone who hasn't contributed code
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2011, Christopher Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov
wrote:
On 1/27/11 3:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one for
development discussions and one
13 matches
Mail list logo
