From tcaswell at gmail.com  Tue Oct  9 22:27:44 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 22:27:44 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
Message-ID: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>

Folks,

I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and 3.1 in
March - April 2019.

Thoughts?

Tom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181009/59e56906/attachment.html>

From rmay31 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 14:36:06 2018
From: rmay31 at gmail.com (Ryan May)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:36:06 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>

I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
longer than anticipated.

Ryan

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and 3.1 in
> March - April 2019.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Tom
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-- 
Ryan May
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/71018e27/attachment.html>

From pmhobson at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 14:59:07 2018
From: pmhobson at gmail.com (Paul Hobson)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 11:59:07 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>

Agree with Ryan.

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
> longer than anticipated.
>
> Ryan
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and 3.1
>> in March - April 2019.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Tom
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
> --
> Ryan May
>
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/75e4bf7e/attachment.html>

From daniele at grinta.net  Wed Oct 10 21:29:25 2018
From: daniele at grinta.net (Daniele Nicolodi)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:29:25 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] Font rendering quality issues on macOS with 3.0
 release
Message-ID: <9b649366-8024-a665-2f6b-a6399f057a3f@grinta.net>

Hello,

I upgraded to matplotlib 3.0 and font rendering quality with the MacOSX
backend definitely decreased. Is it a known issue? What changed in the
MacOSX backend to cause it?

Thanks. Cheers,
Dan

From daniele at grinta.net  Wed Oct 10 21:26:18 2018
From: daniele at grinta.net (Daniele Nicolodi)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:26:18 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] font_manger.findSystemFonts() broken on macOS in
 matplotlib 3.0
Message-ID: <cf63f384-f212-3458-c5a1-46f0b3fddf51@grinta.net>

Hello,

font_manger.findSystemFonts() is broken on macOS in matplotlib 3.0
because the function OSXInstalledFonts() is broken. I was about to send
a patch but I see that the function is now deprecated. However, I think
it should be fixed in the 3.0.1 release. The patch is attached.

Cheers,
Dan
-------------- next part --------------
From fda67ab81b362d5a57f1c1a3f99766a50c7d5fb5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniele Nicolodi <daniele at grinta.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:23:22 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] Fix font_manager.OSXInstalledFonts()

---
 lib/matplotlib/font_manager.py | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/matplotlib/font_manager.py b/lib/matplotlib/font_manager.py
index 37a0c7fc1..7a8f873f9 100644
--- a/lib/matplotlib/font_manager.py
+++ b/lib/matplotlib/font_manager.py
@@ -218,8 +218,7 @@ def OSXInstalledFonts(directories=None, fontext='ttf'):
         directories = OSXFontDirectories
     return [path
             for directory in directories
-            for ext in get_fontext_synonyms(fontext)
-            for path in list_fonts(directory, ext)]
+            for path in list_fonts(directory, get_fontext_synonyms(fontext))]
 
 
 @lru_cache()
-- 
2.15.2 (Apple Git-101.1)


From tcaswell at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 21:32:37 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:32:37 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] Font rendering quality issues on macOS with
 3.0 release
In-Reply-To: <9b649366-8024-a665-2f6b-a6399f057a3f@grinta.net>
References: <9b649366-8024-a665-2f6b-a6399f057a3f@grinta.net>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF-GNgXqhDiF8c3QcaYwP7Khm3EOEJ0-NsShd2k5YP1vQw@mail.gmail.com>

This is not a known issue.

What version did you upgrade from?

If you remove the contents of  ~/.cach/matplotlib does it fix the issue
(guessing it is a font search related issue)?

Can you include any screenshots?  Are you using any non-standard fornts?
Are you using latex?

Tom

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:29 PM Daniele Nicolodi <daniele at grinta.net> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I upgraded to matplotlib 3.0 and font rendering quality with the MacOSX
> backend definitely decreased. Is it a known issue? What changed in the
> MacOSX backend to cause it?
>
> Thanks. Cheers,
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>


-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/f7238656/attachment-0001.html>

From daniele at grinta.net  Wed Oct 10 21:40:11 2018
From: daniele at grinta.net (Daniele Nicolodi)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:40:11 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] IPython terminal issues with matplotlib 3.0 on
 macOS
Message-ID: <623036b5-9510-e147-ba55-c7defb35c0d2@grinta.net>

Hello,

I just upgraded to matplotlib 3.0 and I'm noticing an annoying issue
using matplotlib in the IPython terminal.  When I import
matplotlib.pyplot the terminal looses focus and some spurious escape
sequences appear in the terminal (last line below):

$ python.app -m IPython
Python 3.6.6 |Anaconda custom (64-bit)| (default, Jun 28 2018, 11:07:29)
Type 'copyright', 'credits' or 'license' for more information
IPython 7.0.1 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. Type '?' for help.

In [1]: import matplotlib.pyplot as plt



^[[47;1RIn [2]:

I guess this is due to matplotlib probing the different backends, but I
don't know where to look for the exact cause of this.

Cheers,
Dan

From bussonniermatthias at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 21:42:42 2018
From: bussonniermatthias at gmail.com (Matthias Bussonnier)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 18:42:42 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] IPython terminal issues with matplotlib 3.0
 on macOS
In-Reply-To: <623036b5-9510-e147-ba55-c7defb35c0d2@grinta.net>
References: <623036b5-9510-e147-ba55-c7defb35c0d2@grinta.net>
Message-ID: <CANJQusUAQJEvbu8xE_rpF+d6xQr5AvyA53bY1TONbG_ungG41A@mail.gmail.com>

The spurious escape sequence is an IPython bug for sure. We don't know
exactly how to fix it.
The loosing focus might also be, we're not sure where this came from, it
appear only when using the Python.app launcher. Maybe some changes in the
gui integration.

-- 
Matthias

On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:40, Daniele Nicolodi <daniele at grinta.net> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I just upgraded to matplotlib 3.0 and I'm noticing an annoying issue
> using matplotlib in the IPython terminal.  When I import
> matplotlib.pyplot the terminal looses focus and some spurious escape
> sequences appear in the terminal (last line below):
>
> $ python.app -m IPython
> Python 3.6.6 |Anaconda custom (64-bit)| (default, Jun 28 2018, 11:07:29)
> Type 'copyright', 'credits' or 'license' for more information
> IPython 7.0.1 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. Type '?' for help.
>
> In [1]: import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
>
>
>
> ^[[47;1RIn [2]:
>
> I guess this is due to matplotlib probing the different backends, but I
> don't know where to look for the exact cause of this.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/b1dadcb0/attachment.html>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 21:44:33 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:44:33 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] IPython terminal issues with matplotlib 3.0
 on macOS
In-Reply-To: <CANJQusUAQJEvbu8xE_rpF+d6xQr5AvyA53bY1TONbG_ungG41A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <623036b5-9510-e147-ba55-c7defb35c0d2@grinta.net>
 <CANJQusUAQJEvbu8xE_rpF+d6xQr5AvyA53bY1TONbG_ungG41A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF94r8BhfWG5-JPrhiw5TSDdMt0EzDjO41M-6xvWrvCsxA@mail.gmail.com>

Changes on the mpl side or on the jupyter side?

We also have https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/issues/12188 which is
due to mpl not handling the OSX backend discovery correctly in all cases.

Tom

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:42 PM Matthias Bussonnier <
bussonniermatthias at gmail.com> wrote:

> The spurious escape sequence is an IPython bug for sure. We don't know
> exactly how to fix it.
> The loosing focus might also be, we're not sure where this came from, it
> appear only when using the Python.app launcher. Maybe some changes in the
> gui integration.
>
> --
> Matthias
>
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:40, Daniele Nicolodi <daniele at grinta.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just upgraded to matplotlib 3.0 and I'm noticing an annoying issue
>> using matplotlib in the IPython terminal.  When I import
>> matplotlib.pyplot the terminal looses focus and some spurious escape
>> sequences appear in the terminal (last line below):
>>
>> $ python.app -m IPython
>> Python 3.6.6 |Anaconda custom (64-bit)| (default, Jun 28 2018, 11:07:29)
>> Type 'copyright', 'credits' or 'license' for more information
>> IPython 7.0.1 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. Type '?' for help.
>>
>> In [1]: import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
>>
>>
>>
>> ^[[47;1RIn [2]:
>>
>> I guess this is due to matplotlib probing the different backends, but I
>> don't know where to look for the exact cause of this.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dan
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/a4ed18b9/attachment.html>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 21:49:57 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:49:57 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>

Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4 seems
realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported, we have
enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.

Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary and a
final release sometime in March?

Tom


On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Agree with Ryan.
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>> longer than anticipated.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and 3.1
>>> in March - April 2019.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Tom
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>
>> --
>> Ryan May
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/db382a23/attachment-0001.html>

From daniele at grinta.net  Wed Oct 10 21:53:10 2018
From: daniele at grinta.net (Daniele Nicolodi)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:53:10 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] IPython terminal issues with matplotlib 3.0
 on macOS
In-Reply-To: <CANJQusUAQJEvbu8xE_rpF+d6xQr5AvyA53bY1TONbG_ungG41A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <623036b5-9510-e147-ba55-c7defb35c0d2@grinta.net>
 <CANJQusUAQJEvbu8xE_rpF+d6xQr5AvyA53bY1TONbG_ungG41A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <efbf3658-20ba-12eb-9c90-327602a00f30@grinta.net>

On 10-10-2018 19:42, Matthias Bussonnier wrote:
> The spurious escape sequence is an IPython bug for sure. We don't know
> exactly how to fix it.

The problem was not there with the older matplotlib, I find it hard to
to blame IPython for it, there must be something that triggers it when
matplotlib.pyplot is imported.

> The loosing focus might also be, we're not sure where this came from, it
> appear only when using the Python.app launcher. Maybe some changes in
> the gui integration.

:-(   It is very annoying.

Cheers,
Dan

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 21:57:02 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:57:02 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] font_manger.findSystemFonts() broken on
 macOS in matplotlib 3.0
In-Reply-To: <cf63f384-f212-3458-c5a1-46f0b3fddf51@grinta.net>
References: <cf63f384-f212-3458-c5a1-46f0b3fddf51@grinta.net>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF8XomrQy8Q4ncNkK2bxL+Uqj-X0X1fWq6oBe8qiG-mJZg@mail.gmail.com>

Can you open a PR on github with that patch?  Agree that even though it is
deprecated it should be fixed for 3.0.1.

Tom


On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:32 PM Daniele Nicolodi <daniele at grinta.net> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> font_manger.findSystemFonts() is broken on macOS in matplotlib 3.0
> because the function OSXInstalledFonts() is broken. I was about to send
> a patch but I see that the function is now deprecated. However, I think
> it should be fixed in the 3.0.1 release. The patch is attached.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/6ba78f74/attachment.html>

From nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com  Wed Oct 10 22:00:41 2018
From: nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com (Nelle Varoquaux)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:00:41 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>

My two cents is that the branching process should not be happening to soon:
can we do a feature freeze in master instead? Managing branches for long
period of time can be a pain in the butt?

Cheers,
N

On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:50, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4 seems
> realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported, we have
> enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.
>
> Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary and
> a final release sometime in March?
>
> Tom
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Agree with Ryan.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>>> longer than anticipated.
>>>
>>> Ryan
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and 3.1
>>>> in March - April 2019.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Ryan May
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/a5bc7df7/attachment.html>

From daniele at grinta.net  Wed Oct 10 22:09:32 2018
From: daniele at grinta.net (Daniele Nicolodi)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 20:09:32 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] Font rendering quality issues on macOS with
 3.0 release
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF-GNgXqhDiF8c3QcaYwP7Khm3EOEJ0-NsShd2k5YP1vQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9b649366-8024-a665-2f6b-a6399f057a3f@grinta.net>
 <CAA48SF-GNgXqhDiF8c3QcaYwP7Khm3EOEJ0-NsShd2k5YP1vQw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c2b7136d-733f-517c-8493-bc4f7fc5e839@grinta.net>

Hi Tom,

On 10-10-2018 19:32, Thomas Caswell wrote:
> This is not a known issue.

Please discard the bug report. It was an issue caused by my
configuration as I was messing with it to debug the problem for which I
sent a patch in the other mail.

Thank you. Cheers,
Dan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: matplotlib-v30.png
Type: image/png
Size: 38703 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181010/0c74d683/attachment-0001.png>

From daniele at grinta.net  Wed Oct 10 23:04:58 2018
From: daniele at grinta.net (Daniele Nicolodi)
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:04:58 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] font_manger.findSystemFonts() broken on
 macOS in matplotlib 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF8XomrQy8Q4ncNkK2bxL+Uqj-X0X1fWq6oBe8qiG-mJZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cf63f384-f212-3458-c5a1-46f0b3fddf51@grinta.net>
 <CAA48SF8XomrQy8Q4ncNkK2bxL+Uqj-X0X1fWq6oBe8qiG-mJZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e6d572b1-0732-3bef-1e95-fb5374c7e50a@grinta.net>

On 10-10-2018 19:57, Thomas Caswell wrote:
> Can you open a PR on github with that patch?? Agree that even though it
> is deprecated it should be fixed for 3.0.1.

https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/12485

Dan


From rmay31 at gmail.com  Fri Oct 12 13:33:29 2018
From: rmay31 at gmail.com (Ryan May)
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:33:29 -0600
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKH0P+W6wb9LSVisDssdOcRiWWEy9+yJpJ7vmTy_sD9COzP4HQ@mail.gmail.com>

Nelle,

I hear what you're saying about long-lived branches, but given that we do
bug fix releases off that branch, it's going to be around for a long time
any way; IMO the point is moot.

I'm also not sure that anything that impedes our ability to merge PRs (such
as a feature freeze on master) is a good idea overall.

Ryan

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:01 PM Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com>
wrote:

> My two cents is that the branching process should not be happening to
> soon: can we do a feature freeze in master instead? Managing branches for
> long period of time can be a pain in the butt?
>
> Cheers,
> N
>
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:50, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4 seems
>> realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported, we have
>> enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.
>>
>> Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary and
>> a final release sometime in March?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Agree with Ryan.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>>>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>>>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>>>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>>>> longer than anticipated.
>>>>
>>>> Ryan
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and
>>>>> 3.1 in March - April 2019.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ryan May
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>


-- 
Ryan May
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181012/ec799a60/attachment.html>

From nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com  Fri Oct 12 14:53:37 2018
From: nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com (Nelle Varoquaux)
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:53:37 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAKH0P+W6wb9LSVisDssdOcRiWWEy9+yJpJ7vmTy_sD9COzP4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+W6wb9LSVisDssdOcRiWWEy9+yJpJ7vmTy_sD9COzP4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAE-UAvTG+TtU7sQ-_Vt8VUJD1eNpFUeAytNOF4mKZenzM00HjQ@mail.gmail.com>

It's a question of incentives. It's always "more cool" to implement
features. If you have a feature freezes, but nothing can get merged before
the 10 bugs have been fixed, you'll have more chance of people working on
the bug fixes.
I distinctively remember the 2.0 situation where not many of us where
tackling the 10 remaining tickets, and where we (in my opinion) really
struggled to get the release out of the door.

Cheers,
N

On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 10:33, Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Nelle,
>
> I hear what you're saying about long-lived branches, but given that we do
> bug fix releases off that branch, it's going to be around for a long time
> any way; IMO the point is moot.
>
> I'm also not sure that anything that impedes our ability to merge PRs
> (such as a feature freeze on master) is a good idea overall.
>
> Ryan
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:01 PM Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My two cents is that the branching process should not be happening to
>> soon: can we do a feature freeze in master instead? Managing branches for
>> long period of time can be a pain in the butt?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> N
>>
>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:50, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4
>>> seems realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported,
>>> we have enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.
>>>
>>> Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary
>>> and a final release sometime in March?
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Agree with Ryan.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>>>>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>>>>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>>>>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>>>>> longer than anticipated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and
>>>>>> 3.1 in March - April 2019.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Ryan May
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
>
>
> --
> Ryan May
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181012/4ffdd356/attachment.html>

From anntzer.lee at gmail.com  Sat Oct 13 16:25:42 2018
From: anntzer.lee at gmail.com (Antony Lee)
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 22:25:42 +0200
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAE-UAvTG+TtU7sQ-_Vt8VUJD1eNpFUeAytNOF4mKZenzM00HjQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+W6wb9LSVisDssdOcRiWWEy9+yJpJ7vmTy_sD9COzP4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvTG+TtU7sQ-_Vt8VUJD1eNpFUeAytNOF4mKZenzM00HjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGRr6BFtSbZHFsjd_sQnh0LMC7PpPO8uPjD_42Ck9tHrT0vi0Q@mail.gmail.com>

I have no problem with branching 3.1 early (we are already managing
backports into the very-long-lived 2.2.x branch and that doesn't seem to be
a problem at all).  I'm not sure why you'd want to prevent feature merges
to master for a month.  It's not the end of the world if 3.1 takes 45 days
or even 60 to be released instead of 30...
Antony

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:54 PM Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com>
wrote:

> It's a question of incentives. It's always "more cool" to implement
> features. If you have a feature freezes, but nothing can get merged before
> the 10 bugs have been fixed, you'll have more chance of people working on
> the bug fixes.
> I distinctively remember the 2.0 situation where not many of us where
> tackling the 10 remaining tickets, and where we (in my opinion) really
> struggled to get the release out of the door.
>
> Cheers,
> N
>
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 10:33, Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nelle,
>>
>> I hear what you're saying about long-lived branches, but given that we do
>> bug fix releases off that branch, it's going to be around for a long time
>> any way; IMO the point is moot.
>>
>> I'm also not sure that anything that impedes our ability to merge PRs
>> (such as a feature freeze on master) is a good idea overall.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:01 PM Nelle Varoquaux <
>> nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My two cents is that the branching process should not be happening to
>>> soon: can we do a feature freeze in master instead? Managing branches for
>>> long period of time can be a pain in the butt?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> N
>>>
>>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:50, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4
>>>> seems realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported,
>>>> we have enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.
>>>>
>>>> Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary
>>>> and a final release sometime in March?
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Agree with Ryan.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>>>>>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>>>>>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>>>>>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>>>>>> longer than anticipated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and
>>>>>>> 3.1 in March - April 2019.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Ryan May
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ryan May
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181013/dd081cf8/attachment.html>

From jklymak at uvic.ca  Mon Oct 15 12:58:10 2018
From: jklymak at uvic.ca (Jody Klymak)
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 09:58:10 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] Weekly call...
Message-ID: <684D66D0-66E2-41D0-BD4E-1FFB19B42E3E@uvic.ca>


Hi all, 


Weekly meeting agenda is at https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/Matplotlib-meeting-agenda--APXkIuAoG41HFI7d08HJnSy8Ag-aAmENlkgepgsMeDZtlsYu Suspect we will be largely dealing w. 3.0.1 PRs. But if there is any of your PRs that have been languishing or need guidance, please feel free to add to the agenda.

Cheers,  Jody


--
Jody Klymak    
http://web.uvic.ca/~jklymak/






From tcaswell at gmail.com  Tue Oct 16 08:48:31 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:48:31 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAGRr6BFtSbZHFsjd_sQnh0LMC7PpPO8uPjD_42Ck9tHrT0vi0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+W6wb9LSVisDssdOcRiWWEy9+yJpJ7vmTy_sD9COzP4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvTG+TtU7sQ-_Vt8VUJD1eNpFUeAytNOF4mKZenzM00HjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGRr6BFtSbZHFsjd_sQnh0LMC7PpPO8uPjD_42Ck9tHrT0vi0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF9oVGWxvqUF+QiYG74j7WbQdMx9k38Ux4i9MzN8CF-0hw@mail.gmail.com>

I am also not worried about forking early.  Meeseeksdev makes it pretty
easy to manage backports. I am cautious about over-learning from the 2.0
release process.  Mike and I drastically under-estimated the amount of work
that would be required to begin with and I ended up being the bottle neck
on a number of issues at the end.

I think we are too distributed with too many volunteer devs to freeze
master for a few weeks (on the other hand, freezing master is definitely
how we do this on my day-job projects!).

My main take away from this thread is that there is agreement about the
dates and discussion about process.

Tom

On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 4:26 PM Antony Lee <anntzer.lee at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have no problem with branching 3.1 early (we are already managing
> backports into the very-long-lived 2.2.x branch and that doesn't seem to be
> a problem at all).  I'm not sure why you'd want to prevent feature merges
> to master for a month.  It's not the end of the world if 3.1 takes 45 days
> or even 60 to be released instead of 30...
> Antony
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:54 PM Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It's a question of incentives. It's always "more cool" to implement
>> features. If you have a feature freezes, but nothing can get merged before
>> the 10 bugs have been fixed, you'll have more chance of people working on
>> the bug fixes.
>> I distinctively remember the 2.0 situation where not many of us where
>> tackling the 10 remaining tickets, and where we (in my opinion) really
>> struggled to get the release out of the door.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> N
>>
>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 10:33, Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nelle,
>>>
>>> I hear what you're saying about long-lived branches, but given that we
>>> do bug fix releases off that branch, it's going to be around for a long
>>> time any way; IMO the point is moot.
>>>
>>> I'm also not sure that anything that impedes our ability to merge PRs
>>> (such as a feature freeze on master) is a good idea overall.
>>>
>>> Ryan
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:01 PM Nelle Varoquaux <
>>> nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My two cents is that the branching process should not be happening to
>>>> soon: can we do a feature freeze in master instead? Managing branches for
>>>> long period of time can be a pain in the butt?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> N
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:50, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4
>>>>> seems realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported,
>>>>> we have enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary
>>>>> and a final release sometime in March?
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Agree with Ryan.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>>>>>>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>>>>>>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>>>>>>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>>>>>>> longer than anticipated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October and
>>>>>>>> 3.1 in March - April 2019.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Ryan May
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ryan May
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>


-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181016/7c2bb06e/attachment.html>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Tue Oct 16 08:53:21 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:53:21 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] release schedule
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF9oVGWxvqUF+QiYG74j7WbQdMx9k38Ux4i9MzN8CF-0hw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA48SF-fz8haAWbBh4R4+eaVypB9yzBrnjNRWgXJPv0AaFewPQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+WPBUtxz5KZsCLcj6r4CcFWx6egk5-oc8q3A+X5O-=C-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADT3MEDck5vTDgigAVVh41P0U+r0-eLom2x+=UmW4Zb_NBpL_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF_ykfncbqJvpTb1FrZ=Gn6oa5Ha_d9wvuyM5XegAdMPmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvScnn=8c_KucejScaUqV-85e=59X-67yFaJNqLH0m7i8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKH0P+W6wb9LSVisDssdOcRiWWEy9+yJpJ7vmTy_sD9COzP4HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-UAvTG+TtU7sQ-_Vt8VUJD1eNpFUeAytNOF4mKZenzM00HjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGRr6BFtSbZHFsjd_sQnh0LMC7PpPO8uPjD_42Ck9tHrT0vi0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA48SF9oVGWxvqUF+QiYG74j7WbQdMx9k38Ux4i9MzN8CF-0hw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF9-rP_jP4M=2cTz=ryyDEk+Ty-pzFOmsnM_2uODZE_-ZQ@mail.gmail.com>

If people have bandwidth and a mac, I think the highest priority thing left
for 3.0.1 is the bouncing rocket on OSX

https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/issues/12188


Tom

On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 8:48 AM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am also not worried about forking early.  Meeseeksdev makes it pretty
> easy to manage backports. I am cautious about over-learning from the 2.0
> release process.  Mike and I drastically under-estimated the amount of work
> that would be required to begin with and I ended up being the bottle neck
> on a number of issues at the end.
>
> I think we are too distributed with too many volunteer devs to freeze
> master for a few weeks (on the other hand, freezing master is definitely
> how we do this on my day-job projects!).
>
> My main take away from this thread is that there is agreement about the
> dates and discussion about process.
>
> Tom
>
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 4:26 PM Antony Lee <anntzer.lee at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have no problem with branching 3.1 early (we are already managing
>> backports into the very-long-lived 2.2.x branch and that doesn't seem to be
>> a problem at all).  I'm not sure why you'd want to prevent feature merges
>> to master for a month.  It's not the end of the world if 3.1 takes 45 days
>> or even 60 to be released instead of 30...
>> Antony
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 8:54 PM Nelle Varoquaux <
>> nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's a question of incentives. It's always "more cool" to implement
>>> features. If you have a feature freezes, but nothing can get merged before
>>> the 10 bugs have been fixed, you'll have more chance of people working on
>>> the bug fixes.
>>> I distinctively remember the 2.0 situation where not many of us where
>>> tackling the 10 remaining tickets, and where we (in my opinion) really
>>> struggled to get the release out of the door.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> N
>>>
>>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 10:33, Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nelle,
>>>>
>>>> I hear what you're saying about long-lived branches, but given that we
>>>> do bug fix releases off that branch, it's going to be around for a long
>>>> time any way; IMO the point is moot.
>>>>
>>>> I'm also not sure that anything that impedes our ability to merge PRs
>>>> (such as a feature freeze on master) is a good idea overall.
>>>>
>>>> Ryan
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:01 PM Nelle Varoquaux <
>>>> nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My two cents is that the branching process should not be happening to
>>>>> soon: can we do a feature freeze in master instead? Managing branches for
>>>>> long period of time can be a pain in the butt?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> N
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 at 18:50, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, so looking at my calendar, aiming to do 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 Nov 3-4
>>>>>> seems realistic.  Even if we don't fix everything that has been reported,
>>>>>> we have enough bug-fixes already in it will be worth it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lets plan to create the 3.1.x branch on Jan 31, 2019, RCs in Feburary
>>>>>> and a final release sometime in March?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 2:59 PM Paul Hobson <pmhobson at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Agree with Ryan.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:36 AM Ryan May <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think those are reasonable. My only suggestion would be to try to
>>>>>>>> increase the likelihood of hitting the schedule for 3.1 by starting the
>>>>>>>> branching/RC process sooner. So maybe Feb or even Jan to start? It seems
>>>>>>>> like part of our problem is that the stabilization/close out process takes
>>>>>>>> longer than anticipated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 PM Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think we should aim for 3.0.1 and 2.2.4 by the end of October
>>>>>>>>> and 3.1 in March - April 2019.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Ryan May
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ryan May
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Caswell
> tcaswell at gmail.com
>


-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181016/132050ba/attachment-0001.html>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Tue Oct 16 17:32:47 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:32:47 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] Matplotlib release plans & dropping py35
Message-ID: <CAA48SF8OvQ1DqC+wCrx8C1i471mEpeMbeh1qndD6rtBO2KWz_g@mail.gmail.com>

Folks,

The current proposed release schedule for Matplotlib is:

Nov 3-4, 2018
 - Matplotlib 2.2.4 LTS
 - Matplotlib 3.0.1

These are both bug-fix releases.  Futher bug-fix releases will be as-needed.

April 2019
 - Matplotlib 3.1

This will be a feature release and per our dependency policy [1], we plan
do drop support for python 3.5 which was initially released in September
2015 [2].


Tom


[1] https://matplotlib.org/devdocs/devel/min_dep_policy.html
[2] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0478/
-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181016/0256ed12/attachment.html>

From srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com  Tue Oct 23 11:59:12 2018
From: srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com (Srinivasa Rao)
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 08:59:12 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] upgrade from 2.2.2 to 3.0
Message-ID: <1540310352278-0.post@n5.nabble.com>

Hi,

I am using anaconda distribution for windows 10, 64bit. I am trying to
upgrade my current version 2.2.2 to 3.0.0. I have created a new environment
for 3.0.0 within the same desktop. When I compare two versions, for some
code I am getting unexpected output using axes_grid1 functions
make_axes_locatable,  ImageGrid and mplot3d toolkit as explained below

1. When I ran the code from Matplotlib Tutorial for axes_grid1, at 
https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/scatter_hist_locatable_axes.html
<https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/scatter_hist_locatable_axes.html>  
using 2.2.2 version I am getting expected output as given below
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/scatter_hist_222.png> 
same code run with 3.0.0 gives this figure
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/scatter_hist_300.png> 

2. Similarly when I run the code available at
https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/simple_colorbar.html 
2.2.2 version gives expected output as 
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/colorbar222.png> 
but same code run with 3.0.0 gives this output
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/colorbar300.png> 

3. Finally, the code at
https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/simple_axesgrid.html
when run with 2.2.2 gives expected output
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/imagegrid222.png> 
with 3.0.0 it gives this output
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/imagegrid300.png> 

4. with 3D plotting using mplot3d toolkit, output figure size is very small
compared to expected size we get with version 2.2.2. Even when I increase
figsize argument, 3.0.0 does not give output anywhere closer to expected
size. This is true with single plot figure as well as multiple subplots in a
figure. However, except the size rest of the plot is as expected.

Appreciate any help in resolving these issues.







--
Sent from: http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/matplotlib-devel-f28077.html

From aktiophi at gmail.com  Wed Oct 24 02:18:58 2018
From: aktiophi at gmail.com (cerberus cerberus)
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 23:18:58 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] matplotlib qt trading terminal; finance sample
Message-ID: <CAC_DqTBMa67DxwTpDVPQqcEBdJBqVQZYWmMrqARcRqLDUZ5-rA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Lists,

I will park my matplotlib source code for a trading terminal written in
python2/matplotlib/pyqt4 here
in case one needs reasonable good reference code about how to plot
financial candlestick charts and
indicators with matplotlib and qt.
A sample of a combined orderbook for several crypto currency exchanges is
included,
see attached screenshot.

Google Notice: Wavetrend Robot.

With Kind Regards,

Aktiophi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181023/30c897de/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: matplotlib-trade-terminal-qt.png
Type: image/png
Size: 193621 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181023/30c897de/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: matplotlib-trade-terminal-qt.zip
Type: application/x-zip-compressed
Size: 691683 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181023/30c897de/attachment-0001.bin>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Thu Oct 25 11:51:33 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 11:51:33 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] REL: v3.0.1
Message-ID: <CAA48SF97W8LbgSQQL7WgD8y1HvH-H3jEsQM2-5Sch71eTvoyWA@mail.gmail.com>

Folks,

This is the first bug fix release for the 3.0 series which fixes
several

 - Fix failure to import bug when on Python 3.6.7 and 3.7.1
 - Fixed a number of failure to import bugs around finding fonts
 - Fix Qt4 backend
 - Fix bug on OSX that recursively searched current directory for fonts
 - Fix bouncing-rocket on OSX when doing backend fallback and not
   selecting OSX
 - Temporarily restore several private APIs to unbreak cartopy
 - Make pyplot more tolerant of varying signatures in 3rd-party
   sub-classe
 - Improve datetime64 unit handling
 - Fixed several poor interactions with tight_layout

We had planned to do this next weekend (Nov 3), but the failure to import
bug with the latest patch releases of python 3.6 and 3.7 pushed us to do
this release ASAP.

Wider announcement when wheels are ready when everything is on pypi.

Tom
-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181025/88cdc4d9/attachment.html>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Sun Oct 28 15:34:02 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 15:34:02 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] upgrade from 2.2.2 to 3.0
In-Reply-To: <1540310352278-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
References: <1540310352278-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF9354bwayddgZ6XaU+=9DjOtcGeNns6fiqD=jovmMtTPA@mail.gmail.com>

Srinivasa,

Can you try with v3.0.1?

I am a bit confused as the linked webpages are generated with 3.0.0, why
are the pages rendering correctly?

Tom


On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:59 AM Srinivasa Rao <srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am using anaconda distribution for windows 10, 64bit. I am trying to
> upgrade my current version 2.2.2 to 3.0.0. I have created a new environment
> for 3.0.0 within the same desktop. When I compare two versions, for some
> code I am getting unexpected output using axes_grid1 functions
> make_axes_locatable,  ImageGrid and mplot3d toolkit as explained below
>
> 1. When I ran the code from Matplotlib Tutorial for axes_grid1, at
> https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/scatter_hist_locatable_axes.html
> <
> https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/scatter_hist_locatable_axes.html>
>
> using 2.2.2 version I am getting expected output as given below
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/scatter_hist_222.png>
> same code run with 3.0.0 gives this figure
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/scatter_hist_300.png>
>
> 2. Similarly when I run the code available at
> https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/simple_colorbar.html
> 2.2.2 version gives expected output as
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/colorbar222.png>
> but same code run with 3.0.0 gives this output
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/colorbar300.png>
>
> 3. Finally, the code at
> https://matplotlib.org/gallery/axes_grid1/simple_axesgrid.html
> when run with 2.2.2 gives expected output
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/imagegrid222.png>
> with 3.0.0 it gives this output
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/imagegrid300.png>
>
> 4. with 3D plotting using mplot3d toolkit, output figure size is very small
> compared to expected size we get with version 2.2.2. Even when I increase
> figsize argument, 3.0.0 does not give output anywhere closer to expected
> size. This is true with single plot figure as well as multiple subplots in
> a
> figure. However, except the size rest of the plot is as expected.
>
> Appreciate any help in resolving these issues.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
> http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/matplotlib-devel-f28077.html
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>


-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181028/c4633011/attachment.html>

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Sun Oct 28 15:55:03 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 15:55:03 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] IPython terminal issues with matplotlib 3.0
 on macOS
In-Reply-To: <efbf3658-20ba-12eb-9c90-327602a00f30@grinta.net>
References: <623036b5-9510-e147-ba55-c7defb35c0d2@grinta.net>
 <CANJQusUAQJEvbu8xE_rpF+d6xQr5AvyA53bY1TONbG_ungG41A@mail.gmail.com>
 <efbf3658-20ba-12eb-9c90-327602a00f30@grinta.net>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF8c8MOWNJ2yt-r+acgW4P57a9gaJi-F+gUmeKE9hHfJ4Q@mail.gmail.com>

Daniele,

Can you try with 3.0.1 and report if it is better?

Tom

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 9:53 PM Daniele Nicolodi <daniele at grinta.net> wrote:

> On 10-10-2018 19:42, Matthias Bussonnier wrote:
> > The spurious escape sequence is an IPython bug for sure. We don't know
> > exactly how to fix it.
>
> The problem was not there with the older matplotlib, I find it hard to
> to blame IPython for it, there must be something that triggers it when
> matplotlib.pyplot is imported.
>
> > The loosing focus might also be, we're not sure where this came from, it
> > appear only when using the Python.app launcher. Maybe some changes in
> > the gui integration.
>
> :-(   It is very annoying.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>


-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181028/2ddb3a71/attachment.html>

From srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com  Mon Oct 29 02:20:34 2018
From: srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com (Srinivasa Rao)
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 23:20:34 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] upgrade from 2.2.2 to 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF9354bwayddgZ6XaU+=9DjOtcGeNns6fiqD=jovmMtTPA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1540310352278-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <CAA48SF9354bwayddgZ6XaU+=9DjOtcGeNns6fiqD=jovmMtTPA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1540794034537-0.post@n5.nabble.com>

Hi Tom,

Yes, I have tried 3.0.1. While it has solved my old problems, it has
introduced a new problem, which was not there with 3.0.0!

Giving below the code followed by error log:

Inserting the image of expected output that comes when we run the same code
with 3.0.0 or earlier version
<http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/output300.png> :

----------------------------------------------------------
from mpl_toolkits.axes_grid1 import host_subplot
import mpl_toolkits.axisartist as AA
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

plt.figure()
ax1 = host_subplot(111, axes_class=AA.Axes)

ax1.axis["top"].toggle(all=False)           # switch off ticks and tick
labels for the top axis

ax2 = ax1.twinx()
ax3 = ax1.twinx()

new_fixed_axis = ax3.get_grid_helper().new_fixed_axis
ax3.axis["right"] = new_fixed_axis(loc="right",
                                    axes=ax3,
                                    offset=(60, 0))

ax2.axis["right"].toggle(all=True)
ax3.axis["right"].toggle(all=True)

ax1.set_xlabel('Defect Reason Codes')
ax1.set_ylabel('Number of Defects')
ax2.set_ylabel('Cumulative Defects as %')
ax3.set_ylabel('Cumulative Defects Count')

x = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
y = [19, 12, 6, 4, 3, 2]
y1 = [41, 67, 80, 89, 96, 100]
y2 = [19, 31, 37, 41, 44, 46]

b = ax1.bar(x, y, label='Number of Defects')
l, = ax2.plot(x, y1, lw=5, label='Cumulative Defects as %', color='b')
l1, = ax3.plot(x, y2, lw=5, label='Cumulative Defects Count', color='g')

ax3.set_ylim(15, 50)

ax1.legend(loc=5)
ax1.set_title('Product Defects - August 2018')

ax1.axis["left"].label.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
ax2.axis["right"].label.set_color(l.get_color())
ax3.axis["right"].label.set_color(l1.get_color())

ax1.axis["left"].major_ticks.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
ax2.axis["right"].major_ticks.set_color(l.get_color())
ax3.axis["right"].major_ticks.set_color(l1.get_color())

ax1.axis["left"].major_ticklabels.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
ax2.axis["right"].major_ticklabels.set_color(l.get_color())
ax3.axis["right"].major_ticklabels.set_color(l1.get_color())

# setting the color for axis itself is not working in AA
ax2.spines["right"].set_color(l.get_color())   
ax3.spines["right"].set_color(l1.get_color())

ax1.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
ax2.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
ax3.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)

plt.show()
--------------
Error Log
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TypeError                                 Traceback (most recent call last)
C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\formatters.py in
__call__(self, obj)
    339                 pass
    340             else:
--> 341                 return printer(obj)
    342             # Finally look for special method names
    343             method = get_real_method(obj, self.print_method)

C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\pylabtools.py in
<lambda>(fig)
    242 
    243     if 'png' in formats:
--> 244         png_formatter.for_type(Figure, lambda fig: print_figure(fig,
'png', **kwargs))
    245     if 'retina' in formats or 'png2x' in formats:
    246         png_formatter.for_type(Figure, lambda fig:
retina_figure(fig, **kwargs))

C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\pylabtools.py in
print_figure(fig, fmt, bbox_inches, **kwargs)
    126 
    127     bytes_io = BytesIO()
--> 128     fig.canvas.print_figure(bytes_io, **kw)
    129     data = bytes_io.getvalue()
    130     if fmt == 'svg':

C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\backend_bases.py in
print_figure(self, filename, dpi, facecolor, edgecolor, orientation, format,
bbox_inches, **kwargs)
   2051                     bbox_artists = kwargs.pop("bbox_extra_artists",
None)
   2052                     bbox_inches =
self.figure.get_tightbbox(renderer,
-> 2053                             bbox_extra_artists=bbox_artists)
   2054                     pad = kwargs.pop("pad_inches", None)
   2055                     if pad is None:

C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\figure.py in
get_tightbbox(self, renderer, bbox_extra_artists)
   2274         bb.extend(
   2275             ax.get_tightbbox(renderer,
bbox_extra_artists=bbox_extra_artists)
-> 2276             for ax in self.axes if ax.get_visible())
   2277 
   2278         if len(bb) == 0:

C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\figure.py in
<genexpr>(.0)
   2274         bb.extend(
   2275             ax.get_tightbbox(renderer,
bbox_extra_artists=bbox_extra_artists)
-> 2276             for ax in self.axes if ax.get_visible())
   2277 
   2278         if len(bb) == 0:

TypeError: get_tightbbox() got an unexpected keyword argument
'bbox_extra_artists'

<Figure size 432x288 with 1 Axes>




--
Sent from: http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/matplotlib-devel-f28077.html

From tcaswell at gmail.com  Mon Oct 29 09:45:26 2018
From: tcaswell at gmail.com (Thomas Caswell)
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 09:45:26 -0400
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] upgrade from 2.2.2 to 3.0
In-Reply-To: <1540794034537-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
References: <1540310352278-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <CAA48SF9354bwayddgZ6XaU+=9DjOtcGeNns6fiqD=jovmMtTPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1540794034537-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <CAA48SF9D1rpE=Y5WRdJD1V00Uybs_Z0Puddgk0g_+wM3kRxPGg@mail.gmail.com>

Can you please report that as an issue on github?

Tom

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 2:20 AM Srinivasa Rao <srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> Yes, I have tried 3.0.1. While it has solved my old problems, it has
> introduced a new problem, which was not there with 3.0.0!
>
> Giving below the code followed by error log:
>
> Inserting the image of expected output that comes when we run the same code
> with 3.0.0 or earlier version
> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/output300.png> :
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> from mpl_toolkits.axes_grid1 import host_subplot
> import mpl_toolkits.axisartist as AA
> import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
>
> plt.figure()
> ax1 = host_subplot(111, axes_class=AA.Axes)
>
> ax1.axis["top"].toggle(all=False)           # switch off ticks and tick
> labels for the top axis
>
> ax2 = ax1.twinx()
> ax3 = ax1.twinx()
>
> new_fixed_axis = ax3.get_grid_helper().new_fixed_axis
> ax3.axis["right"] = new_fixed_axis(loc="right",
>                                     axes=ax3,
>                                     offset=(60, 0))
>
> ax2.axis["right"].toggle(all=True)
> ax3.axis["right"].toggle(all=True)
>
> ax1.set_xlabel('Defect Reason Codes')
> ax1.set_ylabel('Number of Defects')
> ax2.set_ylabel('Cumulative Defects as %')
> ax3.set_ylabel('Cumulative Defects Count')
>
> x = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
> y = [19, 12, 6, 4, 3, 2]
> y1 = [41, 67, 80, 89, 96, 100]
> y2 = [19, 31, 37, 41, 44, 46]
>
> b = ax1.bar(x, y, label='Number of Defects')
> l, = ax2.plot(x, y1, lw=5, label='Cumulative Defects as %', color='b')
> l1, = ax3.plot(x, y2, lw=5, label='Cumulative Defects Count', color='g')
>
> ax3.set_ylim(15, 50)
>
> ax1.legend(loc=5)
> ax1.set_title('Product Defects - August 2018')
>
> ax1.axis["left"].label.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
> ax2.axis["right"].label.set_color(l.get_color())
> ax3.axis["right"].label.set_color(l1.get_color())
>
> ax1.axis["left"].major_ticks.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
> ax2.axis["right"].major_ticks.set_color(l.get_color())
> ax3.axis["right"].major_ticks.set_color(l1.get_color())
>
> ax1.axis["left"].major_ticklabels.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
> ax2.axis["right"].major_ticklabels.set_color(l.get_color())
> ax3.axis["right"].major_ticklabels.set_color(l1.get_color())
>
> # setting the color for axis itself is not working in AA
> ax2.spines["right"].set_color(l.get_color())
> ax3.spines["right"].set_color(l1.get_color())
>
> ax1.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
> ax2.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
> ax3.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
>
> plt.show()
> --------------
> Error Log
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> TypeError                                 Traceback (most recent call last)
> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\formatters.py in
> __call__(self, obj)
>     339                 pass
>     340             else:
> --> 341                 return printer(obj)
>     342             # Finally look for special method names
>     343             method = get_real_method(obj, self.print_method)
>
> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\pylabtools.py in
> <lambda>(fig)
>     242
>     243     if 'png' in formats:
> --> 244         png_formatter.for_type(Figure, lambda fig:
> print_figure(fig,
> 'png', **kwargs))
>     245     if 'retina' in formats or 'png2x' in formats:
>     246         png_formatter.for_type(Figure, lambda fig:
> retina_figure(fig, **kwargs))
>
> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\pylabtools.py in
> print_figure(fig, fmt, bbox_inches, **kwargs)
>     126
>     127     bytes_io = BytesIO()
> --> 128     fig.canvas.print_figure(bytes_io, **kw)
>     129     data = bytes_io.getvalue()
>     130     if fmt == 'svg':
>
> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\backend_bases.py
> in
> print_figure(self, filename, dpi, facecolor, edgecolor, orientation,
> format,
> bbox_inches, **kwargs)
>    2051                     bbox_artists = kwargs.pop("bbox_extra_artists",
> None)
>    2052                     bbox_inches =
> self.figure.get_tightbbox(renderer,
> -> 2053                             bbox_extra_artists=bbox_artists)
>    2054                     pad = kwargs.pop("pad_inches", None)
>    2055                     if pad is None:
>
> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\figure.py in
> get_tightbbox(self, renderer, bbox_extra_artists)
>    2274         bb.extend(
>    2275             ax.get_tightbbox(renderer,
> bbox_extra_artists=bbox_extra_artists)
> -> 2276             for ax in self.axes if ax.get_visible())
>    2277
>    2278         if len(bb) == 0:
>
> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\figure.py in
> <genexpr>(.0)
>    2274         bb.extend(
>    2275             ax.get_tightbbox(renderer,
> bbox_extra_artists=bbox_extra_artists)
> -> 2276             for ax in self.axes if ax.get_visible())
>    2277
>    2278         if len(bb) == 0:
>
> TypeError: get_tightbbox() got an unexpected keyword argument
> 'bbox_extra_artists'
>
> <Figure size 432x288 with 1 Axes>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
> http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/matplotlib-devel-f28077.html
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
>


-- 
Thomas Caswell
tcaswell at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181029/ada9fa21/attachment-0001.html>

From jklymak at uvic.ca  Mon Oct 29 10:09:11 2018
From: jklymak at uvic.ca (Jody Klymak)
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 07:09:11 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] upgrade from 2.2.2 to 3.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA48SF9D1rpE=Y5WRdJD1V00Uybs_Z0Puddgk0g_+wM3kRxPGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1540310352278-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <CAA48SF9354bwayddgZ6XaU+=9DjOtcGeNns6fiqD=jovmMtTPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1540794034537-0.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <CAA48SF9D1rpE=Y5WRdJD1V00Uybs_Z0Puddgk0g_+wM3kRxPGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <741073A8-2303-4726-859E-72E2ED01DC88@uvic.ca>

This has been reported already and fixed and should be available on 3.0.2.  As a work around until then don?t call tight_layout or use master or v2.2.3.  

As a general issue, axes_grid1 toolbox is poorly tested and may suffer from these instabilities at release.  This despite the fact it?s heavily promoted as the solution to many layout issues online. I would use it with caution.  There are some things it can do that the base library cannot, but....

Thanks.  Jody

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 29, 2018, at 6:45 AM, Thomas Caswell <tcaswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Can you please report that as an issue on github?
> 
> Tom
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 2:20 AM Srinivasa Rao <srinivasrao.poladi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Tom,
>> 
>> Yes, I have tried 3.0.1. While it has solved my old problems, it has
>> introduced a new problem, which was not there with 3.0.0!
>> 
>> Giving below the code followed by error log:
>> 
>> Inserting the image of expected output that comes when we run the same code
>> with 3.0.0 or earlier version
>> <http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/file/t5188/output300.png> :
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> from mpl_toolkits.axes_grid1 import host_subplot
>> import mpl_toolkits.axisartist as AA
>> import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
>> 
>> plt.figure()
>> ax1 = host_subplot(111, axes_class=AA.Axes)
>> 
>> ax1.axis["top"].toggle(all=False)           # switch off ticks and tick
>> labels for the top axis
>> 
>> ax2 = ax1.twinx()
>> ax3 = ax1.twinx()
>> 
>> new_fixed_axis = ax3.get_grid_helper().new_fixed_axis
>> ax3.axis["right"] = new_fixed_axis(loc="right",
>>                                     axes=ax3,
>>                                     offset=(60, 0))
>> 
>> ax2.axis["right"].toggle(all=True)
>> ax3.axis["right"].toggle(all=True)
>> 
>> ax1.set_xlabel('Defect Reason Codes')
>> ax1.set_ylabel('Number of Defects')
>> ax2.set_ylabel('Cumulative Defects as %')
>> ax3.set_ylabel('Cumulative Defects Count')
>> 
>> x = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>> y = [19, 12, 6, 4, 3, 2]
>> y1 = [41, 67, 80, 89, 96, 100]
>> y2 = [19, 31, 37, 41, 44, 46]
>> 
>> b = ax1.bar(x, y, label='Number of Defects')
>> l, = ax2.plot(x, y1, lw=5, label='Cumulative Defects as %', color='b')
>> l1, = ax3.plot(x, y2, lw=5, label='Cumulative Defects Count', color='g')
>> 
>> ax3.set_ylim(15, 50)
>> 
>> ax1.legend(loc=5)
>> ax1.set_title('Product Defects - August 2018')
>> 
>> ax1.axis["left"].label.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
>> ax2.axis["right"].label.set_color(l.get_color())
>> ax3.axis["right"].label.set_color(l1.get_color())
>> 
>> ax1.axis["left"].major_ticks.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
>> ax2.axis["right"].major_ticks.set_color(l.get_color())
>> ax3.axis["right"].major_ticks.set_color(l1.get_color())
>> 
>> ax1.axis["left"].major_ticklabels.set_color(b.patches[0].get_facecolor())
>> ax2.axis["right"].major_ticklabels.set_color(l.get_color())
>> ax3.axis["right"].major_ticklabels.set_color(l1.get_color())
>> 
>> # setting the color for axis itself is not working in AA
>> ax2.spines["right"].set_color(l.get_color())   
>> ax3.spines["right"].set_color(l1.get_color())
>> 
>> ax1.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
>> ax2.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
>> ax3.axis[:].major_ticks.set_tick_out(True)
>> 
>> plt.show()
>> --------------
>> Error Log
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> TypeError                                 Traceback (most recent call last)
>> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\formatters.py in
>> __call__(self, obj)
>>     339                 pass
>>     340             else:
>> --> 341                 return printer(obj)
>>     342             # Finally look for special method names
>>     343             method = get_real_method(obj, self.print_method)
>> 
>> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\pylabtools.py in
>> <lambda>(fig)
>>     242 
>>     243     if 'png' in formats:
>> --> 244         png_formatter.for_type(Figure, lambda fig: print_figure(fig,
>> 'png', **kwargs))
>>     245     if 'retina' in formats or 'png2x' in formats:
>>     246         png_formatter.for_type(Figure, lambda fig:
>> retina_figure(fig, **kwargs))
>> 
>> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\IPython\core\pylabtools.py in
>> print_figure(fig, fmt, bbox_inches, **kwargs)
>>     126 
>>     127     bytes_io = BytesIO()
>> --> 128     fig.canvas.print_figure(bytes_io, **kw)
>>     129     data = bytes_io.getvalue()
>>     130     if fmt == 'svg':
>> 
>> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\backend_bases.py in
>> print_figure(self, filename, dpi, facecolor, edgecolor, orientation, format,
>> bbox_inches, **kwargs)
>>    2051                     bbox_artists = kwargs.pop("bbox_extra_artists",
>> None)
>>    2052                     bbox_inches =
>> self.figure.get_tightbbox(renderer,
>> -> 2053                             bbox_extra_artists=bbox_artists)
>>    2054                     pad = kwargs.pop("pad_inches", None)
>>    2055                     if pad is None:
>> 
>> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\figure.py in
>> get_tightbbox(self, renderer, bbox_extra_artists)
>>    2274         bb.extend(
>>    2275             ax.get_tightbbox(renderer,
>> bbox_extra_artists=bbox_extra_artists)
>> -> 2276             for ax in self.axes if ax.get_visible())
>>    2277 
>>    2278         if len(bb) == 0:
>> 
>> C:\Anaconda3\envs\dloct2018\lib\site-packages\matplotlib\figure.py in
>> <genexpr>(.0)
>>    2274         bb.extend(
>>    2275             ax.get_tightbbox(renderer,
>> bbox_extra_artists=bbox_extra_artists)
>> -> 2276             for ax in self.axes if ax.get_visible())
>>    2277 
>>    2278         if len(bb) == 0:
>> 
>> TypeError: get_tightbbox() got an unexpected keyword argument
>> 'bbox_extra_artists'
>> 
>> <Figure size 432x288 with 1 Axes>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Sent from: http://matplotlib.1069221.n5.nabble.com/matplotlib-devel-f28077.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
>> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thomas Caswell
> tcaswell at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Matplotlib-devel mailing list
> Matplotlib-devel at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/matplotlib-devel/attachments/20181029/f0a4f40b/attachment.html>

From jklymak at uvic.ca  Mon Oct 29 13:20:25 2018
From: jklymak at uvic.ca (Jody Klymak)
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:20:25 -0700
Subject: [Matplotlib-devel] Weekly call
Message-ID: <498BCDBC-C798-4F95-BA28-4510D8C718BC@uvic.ca>


Hi all,

Weekly developers call at 1500 EDT at the usuall co-ordinates:

https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/Matplotlib-meeting-agenda--AQesY61ghwxttdYSB8NbyZJdAg-aAmENlkgepgsMeDZtlsYu

Cheers,   Jody




--
Jody Klymak    
http://web.uvic.ca/~jklymak/