[IPython-dev] Proposal: soft moratorium on re-architecting for 5.0

[Sylvain Corlay]

I wanted to +1 the proposal to start creating branches for new versions
when a feature freeze occurs. Independently of the discussion on phosphor,
I completely agree with Min on the diagnosis that there is not enough
available parallel work.

Regarding phosphor and the work on refactoring the front-end, thanks for
creating the centralized phosphor notebook repository in the organization.
I did some experiments lately with the widgets and did not know where this
could fall, or how to share it without requiring it to install phosphor
etc. Coordination is also important for new developments, even when they
have not yet achieved the stability of the main components of the project.

Best,

Sylvain



On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Jason Grout <jason at jasongrout.org> wrote:

>  On 6/26/15 19:45, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
> While I hear very much the spirit of what you are saying, and I
> certainly think that we can't lose sight that the **only** thing that
> ultimately matters is whether we serve our users well or not, there's a
> big piece that is already burning under us that probably can't wait.  In
> fact, at the last dev meeting, Jason already posted his new draft code
> in this direction:
>
> https://github.com/jasongrout/phosphor-notebook
>
>
> I just wanted to mention that I support what Fernando, Brian, and Chris
> have said about moving forward with refactoring the notebook.  We're making
> good progress, even while still ramping up.  For example, Steven Silvester
> has put a lot of work recently in porting over the kernel javascript to
> Typescript and phosphor (along with dependencies):
>
> https://github.com/jasongrout/phosphor-notebook/pull/2
>
> I just put in an in-progress pull request for documenting the API for
> kernels, kernelspecs, and sessions (which I realized when looking at the
> kernel javascript file was woefully undocumented/incorrectly documented):
> https://github.com/jupyter/notebook/pull/173.  This shows our refactoring
> work is also having an immediate direct impact on the current notebook as
> well.
>
> In another message on this thread, Min suggested having a 5.x branch for
> further development, like the phosphor notebook.  For now, I think the
> phosphor notebook can proceed as a separate project - it's totally a
> front-end thing at this point, and we're doing enough code clean-up and
> rewriting from js to typescript that I think it's all right to start in a
> fresh repo.  Which brings up another point:  can we make an official
> Jupyter repo for the phosphor notebook work, rather than using my personal
> repo?  I'm happy to continue hosting
> https://github.com/jasongrout/phosphor-notebook/ in my personal github
> account for the time being, or set up a temporary organization so we can
> collaborate more effectively, but I think it would make more sense to bump
> it up to an experimental repo in the jupyter github organization, developed
> in parallel with the current notebook.
>
> Thomas, one thing to consider is that us working on a phosphor notebook
> doesn't preclude interested people from enhancing the existing notebook in
> the short term.  We'd like the phosphor notebook to get to a comparable
> state with the current notebook as quickly as possible, but it will still
> take some time.
>
> Also, I totally agree with Thomas that dogfooding the notebook (and
> watching/helping others actually use it to get work done) is **extremely**
> important to understanding what we want here.  And I also agree with others
> on this thread that documentation is sorely lacking.  We'll be working on
> that in the phosphor notebook as we go along too.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPython-dev mailing list
> IPython-dev at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/ipython-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/attachments/20150629/1012f75b/attachment.html>