[Numpy-discussion] Introduction to Scott, Jason, and (possibly) others from Enthought

[David Cournapeau]

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Ralf Gommers
<ralf.gommers at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Travis Oliphant <oliphant at enthought.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On May 25, 2010, at 5:06 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Charles R Harris
>> > <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Sounds good, but what if it doesn't get finished in a few months? I
>> >> think we
>> >> should get 2.0.0 out pronto, ideally it would already have been
>> >> released. I
>> >> think a major refactoring like this proposal should get the 3.0.0
>> >> label.
>> >
>> > Naming it 3.0 or 2.1 does not matter much - I think we should avoid
>> > breaking things twice. I can see a few solutions:
>> >  - postpone 2.0 "indefinitely", until this new work is done
>> >  - backport py3k changes to 1.5 (which would be API and ABI
>> > compatible with 1.4.1), and 2.0 would contain all the breaking
>> > changes.
>>
>> This is an interesting idea and also workable.
>>
>> >
>> > I am really worried about breaking things once now and once in a few
>> > months (or even a year).
>>
>> I am too.  That's why this discussion.    We will have the NumPy refactor
>> done by end of July at the latest.   Numpy 2.0 should be able to come out in
>> August.
>>
> This thread got a bit side-tracked with the move to git, but I don't see a
> conclusion about what to release when.

My understanding is that there was a general agreement on splitting
the code that breaks the ABI/API (datetime, maybe future refactoring)
from everything else (mostly py3k port):
 - 1.5: everything in the trunk minus API/ABI breaking stuff
 - 2.0: still in flux, depends on how the refactoring will happen

cheers,

David