I don't understand why you're so upset. First of all, Anaconda 2.0 was not released now, but in may. Then, what I found out is that Spyder was one of the applications that weren't playing nicely with PySide. Migrating did solve most of my problems by migrating to PyQt. Besides, it just changed the default Qt package and PySide is still available through conda.
Also, I don't think that Continuum is "just another parasite". It's making Blaze (though on the shoulders of NumPy, but with parallel in mind), conda and Numba. Although the Pro versions are paid, just releasing some of that as open source seems to me like "non-parasite". 2014-09-07 0:25 GMT-03:00 anatoly techtonik <[email protected]>: > ...PyQt is now the default Qt binding, as some users were experiencing > stability problems > with spyder... > http://continuum.io/blog/anaconda-2-released > > I feel like claims that Anaconda is completely free now are false > https://store.continuum.io/cshop/anaconda/ > > Why am I upset about it? With so much buzz and marketing power that > Continuum > delivers, I expected guys to be active somehow in the open source part of > the ecosystem > and pay attention at the values of the project that are not only at the > top of their IDE list > http://docs.continuum.io/anaconda/ide_integration.html > but also important enough to break dozens (hundreds?) internal > application. That's why a > major version change. > > I am not saying that everybody here wants non-restricted Qt bindings on > Windows. People > usually don't care, but after MS killed Nokia, so that there is no PySide > team anymore, > I'd expect a company like Continuum to be able to calculate the impact > made and provide > at least some support value back to PySide project. Reporting bugs at > minimum. > > It is just my personal rant, but... > Getting the best out of open source projects, wrapping them in package and > marketing it > at a conferences. This is not what you expect from a scientific company > that holds the > keys to open source, algorithms and processing. You expect them to be on a > edge of > researching the economy, the system that powers it - the ecosystem - to > make sure that > useful agents survive, not die. You expect them to be leaders that explain > the trends, how > the stuff works, to provide some hope for this darkness. And what you see > from the > ecosystem point of view? Just another parasite trying to survive in this > "economy". > > Just to make clean about the matter. I am sitting right now trying to code > some stuff for > the money that will be plenty enough for food or buying new clothes, I see > people quitting > social science, biology, neural networks labs just to earn cash and write > dumb > games or join outsourcing business (because, well, it is boring for US > developers to write > and maintain code for their own products). My "quality of life" directly > depends on the > amount of people involved in research jobs, because I hope that one day it > will be possible > to find a solution for my personal issue. Hoped. If money always kills the > game, it is > pointless for me to continue in the open source race, because I will never > be able to > afford the costs of the outcome as I am not as smart as others to earn > some. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "spyder" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "spyder" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
