From jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 05:48:06 2016 From: jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com (Joris Van den Bossche) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 11:48:06 +0200 Subject: [Pandas-dev] ANN: pandas v0.19.0 released Message-ID: Hi all, I'm happy to announce pandas 0.19.0 has been released. This is a major release from 0.18.1 and includes a number of API changes, several new features, enhancements, and performance improvements along with a large number of bug fixes. See the Whatsnew file for more information. We recommend that all users upgrade to this version. This is the work of 5 months of development by 117 contributors. A big thank you to all contributors! Joris --- *What is it:* pandas is a Python package providing fast, flexible, and expressive data structures designed to make working with ?relational? or ?labeled? data both easy and intuitive. It aims to be the fundamental high-level building block for doing practical, real world data analysis in Python. Additionally, it has the broader goal of becoming the most powerful and flexible open source data analysis / manipulation tool available in any language. *Highlights of the 0.19.0 release include:* - New method merge_asof for asof-style time-series joining, see here - The .rolling() method is now time-series aware, see here - read_csv now supports parsing Categorical data, see here - A function union_categorical has been added for combining categoricals, see here - PeriodIndex now has its own period dtype, and changed to be more consistent with other Index classes. See here - Sparse data structures gained enhanced support of int and bool dtypes, see here - Comparison operations with Series no longer ignores the index, see here for an overview of the API changes. - Introduction of a pandas development API for utility functions, see here . - Deprecation of Panel4D and PanelND. We recommend to represent these types of n-dimensional data with the xarray package . - Removal of the previously deprecated modules pandas.io.data, pandas.io.wb, pandas.tools.rplot. See the Whatsnew file for more information. *How to get it:* Source tarballs and windows/mac/linux wheels are available on PyPI (thanks to Christoph Gohlke for the windows wheels, and to Matthew Brett for setting up the mac/linux wheels). Conda packages are already available via the conda-forge channel (conda install pandas -c conda-forge). It will be available on the main channel shortly. *Issues:* Please report any issues on our issue tracker: https://github.com/pydata/pandas/issues *Thanks to all the contributors:* - adneu - Adrien Emery - agraboso - Alex Alekseyev - Alex Vig - Allen Riddell - Amol - Amol Agrawal - Andy R. Terrel - Anthonios Partheniou - babakkeyvani - Ben Kandel - Bob Baxley - Brett Rosen - c123w - Camilo Cota - Chris - chris-b1 - Chris Grinolds - Christian Hudon - Christopher C. Aycock - Chris Warth - cmazzullo - conquistador1492 - cr3 - Daniel Siladji - Douglas McNeil - Drewrey Lupton - dsm054 - Eduardo Blancas Reyes - Elliot Marsden - Evan Wright - Felix Marczinowski - Francis T. O?Donovan - G?bor Lipt?k - Geraint Duck - gfyoung - Giacomo Ferroni - Grant Roch - Haleemur Ali - harshul1610 - Hassan Shamim - iamsimha - Iulius Curt - Ivan Nazarov - jackieleng - Jeff Reback - Jeffrey Gerard - Jenn Olsen - Jim Crist - Joe Jevnik - John Evans - John Freeman - John Liekezer - Johnny Gill - John W. O?Brien - John Zwinck - Jordan Erenrich - Joris Van den Bossche - Josh Howes - Jozef Brandys - Kamil Sindi - Ka Wo Chen - Kerby Shedden - Kernc - Kevin Sheppard - Matthieu Brucher - Maximilian Roos - Michael Scherer - Mike Graham - Mortada Mehyar - mpuels - Muhammad Haseeb Tariq - Nate George - Neil Parley - Nicolas Bonnotte - OXPHOS - Pan Deng / Zora - Paul - Pauli Virtanen - Paul Mestemaker - Pawel Kordek - Pietro Battiston - pijucha - Piotr Jucha - priyankjain - Ravi Kumar Nimmi - Robert Gieseke - Robert Kern - Roger Thomas - Roy Keyes - Russell Smith - Sahil Dua - Sanjiv Lobo - Sa?o Stanovnik - Shawn Heide - sinhrks - Sinhrks - Stephen Kappel - Steve Choi - Stewart Henderson - Sudarshan Konge - Thomas A Caswell - Tom Augspurger - Tom Bird - Uwe Hoffmann - wcwagner - WillAyd - Xiang Zhang - Yadunandan - Yaroslav Halchenko - YG-Riku - Yuichiro Kaneko - yui-knk - zhangjinjie - znmean - ????Yan Facai? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wesmckinn at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 17:18:53 2016 From: wesmckinn at gmail.com (Wes McKinney) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:18:53 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] A dedicated place for pandas 2.0 pull requests and code reviews? Message-ID: hi folks We have https://github.com/pydata/pandas-design already, but: I'm starting to get to work on some prototyping: https://github.com/wesm/pandas/tree/pandas-2.0 Rather than clutter up pydata/pandas with the PRs, code reviews, and occasionally unstable builds for this, I'm thinking of creating pydata/pandas2 (a new repo, but the same git repository as pydata/pandas) and putting up PRs there, and Gerrit code reviews (going to try out gerrithub.io -- I want a lot of scrutiny on this code). Does this sound like a good idea? This will also help others who want to engage in the pandas 2.0 process but not the pandas day-to-day grind. When I reach some checkpoints where design feedback is necessary to move forward I can make some noise there. Going to be mostly essential C++ plumbing (memory management, array reference counting, views, etc.) for the next few weeks. Let me know what you all think. As an aside, as I've started working on this, it's reasonably clear that we're going to want to commit to the copy-on-write path pretty early in the process. Luckily I don't think this is very hard once you can easily determine when there is array data sharing. We may want to explore that topic in some detail in the design docs Thanks Wes From wesmckinn at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 17:27:33 2016 From: wesmckinn at gmail.com (Wes McKinney) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:27:33 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: > no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here > the redirects should be fine > > > On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche > wrote: > > I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we can > certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not seem a > problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other problems?). > But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to prevent > possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just > before the rc. > > Joris > > 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : >> >> >> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be live >> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on the >> mailing list >> also we are changing links in the docs >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> +1 in this >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger >> wrote: >> >> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait till >> after the release candidate? >> >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> wrote: >>> >>> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so OK >>> with going ahead. >>> >>> Joris >>> >>> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >>>> >>>> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine >>>> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll need >>>> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to >>>> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless >>>> in my experience). >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney >>>> wrote: >>>> > I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to >>>> > see what others think about the migration >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer >>>> > wrote: >>>> >> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go for >>>> >> this, I >>>> >> say you should go ahead. >>>> >> >>>> >> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other >>>> >> projects than >>>> >> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. >>>> >> >>>> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney >>>> >> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that is >>>> >>> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort to >>>> >>> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' >>>> >>> privacy. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and hope >>>> >>> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or they >>>> >>> become inactive). >>>> >>> >>>> >>> - Wes >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>> > Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for >>>> >>> > reclaiming an >>>> >>> > unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account >>>> >>> > owner for >>>> >>> > this. >>>> >>> > https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's redirects >>>> >>> > do >>>> >>> > make >>>> >>> > this quite smooth. >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate >>>> >>> > xray org) >>>> >>> > is >>>> >>> > because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, >>>> >>> > which >>>> >>> > appears >>>> >>> > to be in active use. >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated repos >>>> >>> >> to a >>>> >>> >> dedicated GitHub organization. >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> Some arguments for moving to our own org: >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" umbrella >>>> >>> >> (we >>>> >>> >> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> - Dedicated capacity from CI services >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source >>>> >>> >> project >>>> >>> >> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly >>>> >>> >> primarily >>>> >>> >> become a conference / meetup brand) >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of >>>> >>> >> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might >>>> >>> >> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) >>>> >>> >> makes >>>> >>> >> org changes pretty painless these days >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> Thoughts? >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> - Wes >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pandas-dev mailing list > Pandas-dev at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > From jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 17:48:20 2016 From: jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com (Joris Van den Bossche) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 23:48:20 +0200 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: Let's do it No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : > How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: > > no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here > > the redirects should be fine > > > > > > On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche > > wrote: > > > > I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we can > > certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not > seem a > > problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other > problems?). > > But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to > prevent > > possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just > > before the rc. > > > > Joris > > > > 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : > >> > >> > >> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be live > >> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on > the > >> mailing list > >> also we are changing links in the docs > >> > >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: > >> > >> +1 in this > >> > >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger > > >> wrote: > >> > >> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait > till > >> after the release candidate? > >> > >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so > OK > >>> with going ahead. > >>> > >>> Joris > >>> > >>> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : > >>>> > >>>> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine > >>>> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll need > >>>> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to > >>>> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless > >>>> in my experience). > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to > >>>> > see what others think about the migration > >>>> > > >>>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> >> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go > for > >>>> >> this, I > >>>> >> say you should go ahead. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other > >>>> >> projects than > >>>> >> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney < > wesmckinn at gmail.com> > >>>> >> wrote: > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that > is > >>>> >>> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort > to > >>>> >>> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' > >>>> >>> privacy. > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and > hope > >>>> >>> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or > they > >>>> >>> become inactive). > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> - Wes > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer > > >>>> >>> wrote: > >>>> >>> > Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for > >>>> >>> > reclaiming an > >>>> >>> > unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account > >>>> >>> > owner for > >>>> >>> > this. > >>>> >>> > https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's > redirects > >>>> >>> > do > >>>> >>> > make > >>>> >>> > this quite smooth. > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate > >>>> >>> > xray org) > >>>> >>> > is > >>>> >>> > because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, > >>>> >>> > which > >>>> >>> > appears > >>>> >>> > to be in active use. > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > wrote: > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated repos > >>>> >>> >> to a > >>>> >>> >> dedicated GitHub organization. > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> Some arguments for moving to our own org: > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" > umbrella > >>>> >>> >> (we > >>>> >>> >> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> - Dedicated capacity from CI services > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source > >>>> >>> >> project > >>>> >>> >> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly > >>>> >>> >> primarily > >>>> >>> >> become a conference / meetup brand) > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of > >>>> >>> >> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might > >>>> >>> >> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) > >>>> >>> >> makes > >>>> >>> >> org changes pretty painless these days > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> Thoughts? > >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> - Wes > >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ > >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list > >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org > >>>> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Pandas-dev mailing list > >>>> Pandas-dev at python.org > >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Pandas-dev mailing list > >>> Pandas-dev at python.org > >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Pandas-dev mailing list > >> Pandas-dev at python.org > >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pandas-dev mailing list > > Pandas-dev at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeffreback at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 17:49:57 2016 From: jeffreback at gmail.com (Jeff Reback) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:49:57 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: fine by me I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 > On Oct 12, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Joris Van den Bossche wrote: > > Let's do it > > No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? > > 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> > no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here >> > the redirects should be fine >> > >> > >> > On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> > wrote: >> > >> > I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we can >> > certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not seem a >> > problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other problems?). >> > But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to prevent >> > possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just >> > before the rc. >> > >> > Joris >> > >> > 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : >> >> >> >> >> >> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be live >> >> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on the >> >> mailing list >> >> also we are changing links in the docs >> >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> >> >> +1 in this >> >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait till >> >> after the release candidate? >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so OK >> >>> with going ahead. >> >>> >> >>> Joris >> >>> >> >>> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> >>>> >> >>>> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine >> >>>> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll need >> >>>> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to >> >>>> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless >> >>>> in my experience). >> >>>> >> >>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> > I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to >> >>>> > see what others think about the migration >> >>>> > >> >>>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer >> >>>> > wrote: >> >>>> >> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go for >> >>>> >> this, I >> >>>> >> say you should go ahead. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other >> >>>> >> projects than >> >>>> >> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney >> >>>> >> wrote: >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that is >> >>>> >>> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort to >> >>>> >>> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' >> >>>> >>> privacy. >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and hope >> >>>> >>> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or they >> >>>> >>> become inactive). >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> - Wes >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer >> >>>> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for >> >>>> >>> > reclaiming an >> >>>> >>> > unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account >> >>>> >>> > owner for >> >>>> >>> > this. >> >>>> >>> > https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's redirects >> >>>> >>> > do >> >>>> >>> > make >> >>>> >>> > this quite smooth. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate >> >>>> >>> > xray org) >> >>>> >>> > is >> >>>> >>> > because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, >> >>>> >>> > which >> >>>> >>> > appears >> >>>> >>> > to be in active use. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > wrote: >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated repos >> >>>> >>> >> to a >> >>>> >>> >> dedicated GitHub organization. >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> Some arguments for moving to our own org: >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" umbrella >> >>>> >>> >> (we >> >>>> >>> >> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - Dedicated capacity from CI services >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source >> >>>> >>> >> project >> >>>> >>> >> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly >> >>>> >>> >> primarily >> >>>> >>> >> become a conference / meetup brand) >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of >> >>>> >>> >> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might >> >>>> >>> >> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) >> >>>> >>> >> makes >> >>>> >>> >> org changes pretty painless these days >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> Thoughts? >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - Wes >> >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >>>> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >>> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pandas-dev mailing list >> > Pandas-dev at python.org >> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 17:54:18 2016 From: jorisvandenbossche at gmail.com (Joris Van den Bossche) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 23:54:18 +0200 Subject: [Pandas-dev] A dedicated place for pandas 2.0 pull requests and code reviews? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think it is a good idea to keep it separate in the beginning, the pandas repo itself is already noisy enough :-) Only concern: when we start discussing PRs or issues in a pandas2 repo, the distinction with the discussions on pandas-design may start to become unclear. Would it be an option to have the prototyping in a subdirectory of the pandas-design repo itself? On the other hand, the discussions on those PRs may also get too noisy for the people who want to follow the more high-level stuff on pandas-design. Joris 2016-10-12 23:18 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : > hi folks > > We have https://github.com/pydata/pandas-design already, but: I'm > starting to get to work on some prototyping: > > https://github.com/wesm/pandas/tree/pandas-2.0 > > Rather than clutter up pydata/pandas with the PRs, code reviews, and > occasionally unstable builds for this, I'm thinking of creating > pydata/pandas2 (a new repo, but the same git repository as > pydata/pandas) and putting up PRs there, and Gerrit code reviews > (going to try out gerrithub.io -- I want a lot of scrutiny on this > code). Does this sound like a good idea? This will also help others > who want to engage in the pandas 2.0 process but not the pandas > day-to-day grind. > > When I reach some checkpoints where design feedback is necessary to > move forward I can make some noise there. Going to be mostly essential > C++ plumbing (memory management, array reference counting, views, > etc.) for the next few weeks. > > Let me know what you all think. > > As an aside, as I've started working on this, it's reasonably clear > that we're going to want to commit to the copy-on-write path pretty > early in the process. Luckily I don't think this is very hard once you > can easily determine when there is array data sharing. We may want to > explore that topic in some detail in the design docs > > Thanks > Wes > _______________________________________________ > Pandas-dev mailing list > Pandas-dev at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wesmckinn at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 18:51:14 2016 From: wesmckinn at gmail.com (Wes McKinney) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 18:51:14 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: Got it, I'll make the move and try not to create too much disruption On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: > fine by me > > I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 > > On Oct 12, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Joris Van den Bossche > wrote: > > Let's do it > > No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? > > 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> >> How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> > no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here >> > the redirects should be fine >> > >> > >> > On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> > wrote: >> > >> > I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we >> > can >> > certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not >> > seem a >> > problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other >> > problems?). >> > But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to >> > prevent >> > possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just >> > before the rc. >> > >> > Joris >> > >> > 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : >> >> >> >> >> >> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be >> >> live >> >> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on >> >> the >> >> mailing list >> >> also we are changing links in the docs >> >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> >> >> +1 in this >> >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait >> >> till >> >> after the release candidate? >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so >> >>> OK >> >>> with going ahead. >> >>> >> >>> Joris >> >>> >> >>> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> >>>> >> >>>> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine >> >>>> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll >> >>>> need >> >>>> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to >> >>>> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless >> >>>> in my experience). >> >>>> >> >>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> > I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to >> >>>> > see what others think about the migration >> >>>> > >> >>>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer >> >>>> > wrote: >> >>>> >> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go >> >>>> >> for >> >>>> >> this, I >> >>>> >> say you should go ahead. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other >> >>>> >> projects than >> >>>> >> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> wrote: >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that >> >>>> >>> is >> >>>> >>> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort >> >>>> >>> to >> >>>> >>> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' >> >>>> >>> privacy. >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and >> >>>> >>> hope >> >>>> >>> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or >> >>>> >>> they >> >>>> >>> become inactive). >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> - Wes >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> > Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for >> >>>> >>> > reclaiming an >> >>>> >>> > unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account >> >>>> >>> > owner for >> >>>> >>> > this. >> >>>> >>> > https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's >> >>>> >>> > redirects >> >>>> >>> > do >> >>>> >>> > make >> >>>> >>> > this quite smooth. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate >> >>>> >>> > xray org) >> >>>> >>> > is >> >>>> >>> > because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, >> >>>> >>> > which >> >>>> >>> > appears >> >>>> >>> > to be in active use. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > wrote: >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated >> >>>> >>> >> repos >> >>>> >>> >> to a >> >>>> >>> >> dedicated GitHub organization. >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> Some arguments for moving to our own org: >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" >> >>>> >>> >> umbrella >> >>>> >>> >> (we >> >>>> >>> >> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - Dedicated capacity from CI services >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source >> >>>> >>> >> project >> >>>> >>> >> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly >> >>>> >>> >> primarily >> >>>> >>> >> become a conference / meetup brand) >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of >> >>>> >>> >> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might >> >>>> >>> >> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) >> >>>> >>> >> makes >> >>>> >>> >> org changes pretty painless these days >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> Thoughts? >> >>>> >>> >> >> >>>> >>> >> - Wes >> >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >>>> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >>> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pandas-dev mailing list >> > Pandas-dev at python.org >> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> > > > From wesmckinn at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 18:52:37 2016 From: wesmckinn at gmail.com (Wes McKinney) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 18:52:37 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] A dedicated place for pandas 2.0 pull requests and code reviews? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You're right -- it would be good to have the PRs and design discussions in one place as there will be a lot of interconnectedness. I don't think there will be a ton of PRs, at most a few each week to start. I'll rename pandas-design to pandas-dev/pandas2 and create a pandas-2.0 code branch there On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Joris Van den Bossche wrote: > I think it is a good idea to keep it separate in the beginning, the pandas > repo itself is already noisy enough :-) > > Only concern: when we start discussing PRs or issues in a pandas2 repo, the > distinction with the discussions on pandas-design may start to become > unclear. > Would it be an option to have the prototyping in a subdirectory of the > pandas-design repo itself? On the other hand, the discussions on those PRs > may also get too noisy for the people who want to follow the more high-level > stuff on pandas-design. > > Joris > > 2016-10-12 23:18 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> >> hi folks >> >> We have https://github.com/pydata/pandas-design already, but: I'm >> starting to get to work on some prototyping: >> >> https://github.com/wesm/pandas/tree/pandas-2.0 >> >> Rather than clutter up pydata/pandas with the PRs, code reviews, and >> occasionally unstable builds for this, I'm thinking of creating >> pydata/pandas2 (a new repo, but the same git repository as >> pydata/pandas) and putting up PRs there, and Gerrit code reviews >> (going to try out gerrithub.io -- I want a lot of scrutiny on this >> code). Does this sound like a good idea? This will also help others >> who want to engage in the pandas 2.0 process but not the pandas >> day-to-day grind. >> >> When I reach some checkpoints where design feedback is necessary to >> move forward I can make some noise there. Going to be mostly essential >> C++ plumbing (memory management, array reference counting, views, >> etc.) for the next few weeks. >> >> Let me know what you all think. >> >> As an aside, as I've started working on this, it's reasonably clear >> that we're going to want to commit to the copy-on-write path pretty >> early in the process. Luckily I don't think this is very hard once you >> can easily determine when there is array data sharing. We may want to >> explore that topic in some detail in the design docs >> >> Thanks >> Wes >> _______________________________________________ >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > From wesmckinn at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 19:01:59 2016 From: wesmckinn at gmail.com (Wes McKinney) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 19:01:59 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: It's done: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas Clicking that red button was terrifying On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > Got it, I'll make the move and try not to create too much disruption > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> fine by me >> >> I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 >> >> On Oct 12, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Joris Van den Bossche >> wrote: >> >> Let's do it >> >> No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? >> >> 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >>> >>> How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >>> > no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here >>> > the redirects should be fine >>> > >>> > >>> > On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we >>> > can >>> > certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not >>> > seem a >>> > problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other >>> > problems?). >>> > But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to >>> > prevent >>> > possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just >>> > before the rc. >>> > >>> > Joris >>> > >>> > 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be >>> >> live >>> >> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on >>> >> the >>> >> mailing list >>> >> also we are changing links in the docs >>> >> >>> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >>> >> >>> >> +1 in this >>> >> >>> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger >>> >> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait >>> >> till >>> >> after the release candidate? >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so >>> >>> OK >>> >>> with going ahead. >>> >>> >>> >>> Joris >>> >>> >>> >>> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >>> >>>> >>> >>>> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine >>> >>>> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll >>> >>>> need >>> >>>> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to >>> >>>> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless >>> >>>> in my experience). >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> > I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to >>> >>>> > see what others think about the migration >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer >>> >>>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go >>> >>>> >> for >>> >>>> >> this, I >>> >>>> >> say you should go ahead. >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other >>> >>>> >> projects than >>> >>>> >> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that >>> >>>> >>> is >>> >>>> >>> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort >>> >>>> >>> to >>> >>>> >>> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' >>> >>>> >>> privacy. >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and >>> >>>> >>> hope >>> >>>> >>> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or >>> >>>> >>> they >>> >>>> >>> become inactive). >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> - Wes >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> > Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for >>> >>>> >>> > reclaiming an >>> >>>> >>> > unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account >>> >>>> >>> > owner for >>> >>>> >>> > this. >>> >>>> >>> > https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ >>> >>>> >>> > >>> >>>> >>> > I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's >>> >>>> >>> > redirects >>> >>>> >>> > do >>> >>>> >>> > make >>> >>>> >>> > this quite smooth. >>> >>>> >>> > >>> >>>> >>> > The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate >>> >>>> >>> > xray org) >>> >>>> >>> > is >>> >>>> >>> > because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, >>> >>>> >>> > which >>> >>>> >>> > appears >>> >>>> >>> > to be in active use. >>> >>>> >>> > >>> >>>> >>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney >>> >>>> >>> > >>> >>>> >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated >>> >>>> >>> >> repos >>> >>>> >>> >> to a >>> >>>> >>> >> dedicated GitHub organization. >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> Some arguments for moving to our own org: >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" >>> >>>> >>> >> umbrella >>> >>>> >>> >> (we >>> >>>> >>> >> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> - Dedicated capacity from CI services >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source >>> >>>> >>> >> project >>> >>>> >>> >> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly >>> >>>> >>> >> primarily >>> >>>> >>> >> become a conference / meetup brand) >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of >>> >>>> >>> >> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might >>> >>>> >>> >> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) >>> >>>> >>> >> makes >>> >>>> >>> >> org changes pretty painless these days >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> Thoughts? >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> - Wes >>> >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >>> >>>> >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >>> >>>> >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> >>>> >>> > >>> >>>> >>> > >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>> >>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>> >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>> >>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >>> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >>> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Pandas-dev mailing list >>> > Pandas-dev at python.org >>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>> > >> >> From jeffreback at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 20:01:07 2016 From: jeffreback at gmail.com (Jeff Reback) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:01:07 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: something wrong with the permissions settings button has disappeared I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 > On Oct 12, 2016, at 7:01 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > > It's done: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas > > Clicking that red button was terrifying > >> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: >> Got it, I'll make the move and try not to create too much disruption >> >>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: >>> fine by me >>> >>> I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 >>> >>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Joris Van den Bossche >>> wrote: >>> >>> Let's do it >>> >>> No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? >>> >>> 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >>>> >>>> How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >>>>> no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here >>>>> the redirects should be fine >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we >>>>> can >>>>> certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not >>>>> seem a >>>>> problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other >>>>> problems?). >>>>> But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to >>>>> prevent >>>>> possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just >>>>> before the rc. >>>>> >>>>> Joris >>>>> >>>>> 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be >>>>>> live >>>>>> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on >>>>>> the >>>>>> mailing list >>>>>> also we are changing links in the docs >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 in this >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait >>>>>> till >>>>>> after the release candidate? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so >>>>>>> OK >>>>>>> with going ahead. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Joris >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine >>>>>>>> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll >>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to >>>>>>>> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless >>>>>>>> in my experience). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to >>>>>>>>> see what others think about the migration >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> this, I >>>>>>>>>> say you should go ahead. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other >>>>>>>>>> projects than >>>>>>>>>> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that >>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' >>>>>>>>>>> privacy. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and >>>>>>>>>>> hope >>>>>>>>>>> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or >>>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>> become inactive). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - Wes >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for >>>>>>>>>>>> reclaiming an >>>>>>>>>>>> unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account >>>>>>>>>>>> owner for >>>>>>>>>>>> this. >>>>>>>>>>>> https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's >>>>>>>>>>>> redirects >>>>>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>>>>> make >>>>>>>>>>>> this quite smooth. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate >>>>>>>>>>>> xray org) >>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>> because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, >>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>> appears >>>>>>>>>>>> to be in active use. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated >>>>>>>>>>>>> repos >>>>>>>>>>>>> to a >>>>>>>>>>>>> dedicated GitHub organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Some arguments for moving to our own org: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" >>>>>>>>>>>>> umbrella >>>>>>>>>>>>> (we >>>>>>>>>>>>> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Dedicated capacity from CI services >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source >>>>>>>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>>>>>>> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly >>>>>>>>>>>>> primarily >>>>>>>>>>>>> become a conference / meetup brand) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of >>>>>>>>>>>>> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might >>>>>>>>>>>>> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) >>>>>>>>>>>>> makes >>>>>>>>>>>>> org changes pretty painless these days >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Wes >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>>>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pandas-dev mailing list >>>>> Pandas-dev at python.org >>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >>>>> >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wesmckinn at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 20:16:08 2016 From: wesmckinn at gmail.com (Wes McKinney) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:16:08 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: Fixed (admin write had gotten dropped). On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: > > something wrong with the permissions > settings button has disappeared > > I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 > > On Oct 12, 2016, at 7:01 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > > It's done: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas > > Clicking that red button was terrifying > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > > Got it, I'll make the move and try not to create too much disruption > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: > > fine by me > > > I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 > > > On Oct 12, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Joris Van den Bossche > > wrote: > > > Let's do it > > > No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? > > > 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : > > > How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? > > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: > > no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here > > the redirects should be fine > > > > On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche > > wrote: > > > I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we > > can > > certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not > > seem a > > problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other > > problems?). > > But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to > > prevent > > possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just > > before the rc. > > > Joris > > > 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : > > > > I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be > > live > > so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on > > the > > mailing list > > also we are changing links in the docs > > > On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: > > > +1 in this > > > On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger > > > > wrote: > > > I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait > > till > > after the release candidate? > > > On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche > > wrote: > > > I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so > > OK > > with going ahead. > > > Joris > > > 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : > > > What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine > > there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll > > need > > to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to > > day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless > > in my experience). > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney > > wrote: > > I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to > > see what others think about the migration > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer > > wrote: > > Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go > > for > > this, I > > say you should go ahead. > > > My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other > > projects than > > pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney > > > > wrote: > > > According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that > > is > > not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort > > to > > start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' > > privacy. > > > We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and > > hope > > that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or > > they > > become inactive). > > > - Wes > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer > > > > wrote: > > Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for > > reclaiming an > > unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account > > owner for > > this. > > https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ > > > I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's > > redirects > > do > > make > > this quite smooth. > > > The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate > > xray org) > > is > > because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, > > which > > appears > > to be in active use. > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney > > > > wrote: > > > We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated > > repos > > to a > > dedicated GitHub organization. > > > Some arguments for moving to our own org: > > > - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" > > umbrella > > (we > > can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) > > > - Dedicated capacity from CI services > > > - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source > > project > > branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly > > primarily > > become a conference / meetup brand) > > > While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of > > github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might > > consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) > > makes > > org changes pretty painless these days > > > Thoughts? > > > - Wes > > _______________________________________________ > > Pandas-dev mailing list > > Pandas-dev at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pandas-dev mailing list > > Pandas-dev at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pandas-dev mailing list > > Pandas-dev at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pandas-dev mailing list > > Pandas-dev at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pandas-dev mailing list > > Pandas-dev at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev > > > > From jeffreback at gmail.com Wed Oct 12 20:26:37 2016 From: jeffreback at gmail.com (Jeff Reback) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:26:37 -0400 Subject: [Pandas-dev] Our own GitHub organization? In-Reply-To: References: <5C08151C-FC74-4031-99A7-A977CED7F977@gmail.com> Message-ID: looks good ty I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 > On Oct 12, 2016, at 8:16 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: > > Fixed (admin write had gotten dropped). > >> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> something wrong with the permissions >> settings button has disappeared >> >> I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 >> >> On Oct 12, 2016, at 7:01 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: >> >> It's done: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas >> >> Clicking that red button was terrifying >> >> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Wes McKinney wrote: >> >> Got it, I'll make the move and try not to create too much disruption >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> fine by me >> >> >> I can be reached on my cell 917-971-6387 >> >> >> On Oct 12, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Joris Van den Bossche >> >> wrote: >> >> >> Let's do it >> >> >> No answer yet from the 'pandas' user? >> >> >> 2016-10-12 23:27 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> >> >> How do you all feel about moving the repos to github.com/pandas-dev? >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> no it was for the announcement and doc changes that matter here >> >> the redirects should be fine >> >> >> >> On Sep 6, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> >> wrote: >> >> >> I am not sure that it has to wait until the actual 0.19.0 release (we >> >> can >> >> certainly announce it then, but doing the transition earlier does not >> >> seem a >> >> problem given all redirects. Or Jeff, are you thinking of other >> >> problems?). >> >> But as Tom suggested, maybe we can wait until after the rc just to >> >> prevent >> >> possible short-term problems with travis etc that have to be fixed just >> >> before the rc. >> >> >> Joris >> >> >> 2016-09-05 17:48 GMT+02:00 Jeff Reback : >> >> >> >> I think this would need to wait for the actual 0.19.0 release to be >> >> live >> >> so it can be announced - lots more folks read the whatsnew that are on >> >> the >> >> mailing list >> >> also we are changing links in the docs >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:17 AM, Jeff Reback wrote: >> >> >> +1 in this >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Tom Augspurger >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> I just migrated a repo and it was painless. Is there a reason to wait >> >> till >> >> after the release candidate? >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Joris Van den Bossche >> >> wrote: >> >> >> I am positive on a move (although the 'pandas' org would be nice), so >> >> OK >> >> with going ahead. >> >> >> Joris >> >> >> 2016-09-05 16:04 GMT+02:00 Wes McKinney : >> >> >> What does everyone think about going ahead with the move? I imagine >> >> there are a variety of services (e.g. Travis CI and others) we'll >> >> need >> >> to migrate over concurrently. Want to avoid possible disruptions to >> >> day-to-day development (luckily GitHub has made this mostly painless >> >> in my experience). >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Wes McKinney >> >> wrote: >> >> I've parked github.com/pandas-dev for the time being. Interested to >> >> see what others think about the migration >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Stephan Hoyer >> >> wrote: >> >> Too bad about the "pandas" GitHub name. Still, if you want to go >> >> for >> >> this, I >> >> say you should go ahead. >> >> >> My sense (have not checked actual data here) is that all other >> >> projects than >> >> pandas add a very minimal amount of CI burden, though. >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Wes McKinney >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> According to GitHub, the pandas account is showing activity that >> >> is >> >> not publicly visible. I've contacted the user twice in an effort >> >> to >> >> start a dialog but GitHub is very strict about protecting users' >> >> privacy. >> >> >> We could do something like @pandas-org for the time being, and >> >> hope >> >> that at some point we are able to contact the @pandas user (or >> >> they >> >> become inactive). >> >> >> - Wes >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Stephan Hoyer >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> Did you have any luck going through GitHub's process for >> >> reclaiming an >> >> unused name? You don't necessarily need to contact the account >> >> owner for >> >> this. >> >> https://help.github.com/articles/name-squatting-policy/ >> >> >> I'm +1 for switching to a dedicated pandas org. GitHub's >> >> redirects >> >> do >> >> make >> >> this quite smooth. >> >> >> The main reason I switched xarray to pydata (from the separate >> >> xray org) >> >> is >> >> because I didn't think I would be successful claiming xarray, >> >> which >> >> appears >> >> to be in active use. >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Wes McKinney >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> We've occasionally discussed moving pandas and associated >> >> repos >> >> to a >> >> dedicated GitHub organization. >> >> >> Some arguments for moving to our own org: >> >> >> - More clear what repositories are part of the "pandas" >> >> umbrella >> >> (we >> >> can potentially formalize this in the pandas-governance repo) >> >> >> - Dedicated capacity from CI services >> >> >> - Easier for us to more clearly develop our own open source >> >> project >> >> branding independent from PyData (which has increasingly >> >> primarily >> >> become a conference / meetup brand) >> >> >> While I haven't had any success contacting the owner of >> >> github.com/pandas, if we can pick a suitable org name we might >> >> consider it. GitHub's route forwarding (including git remotes) >> >> makes >> >> org changes pretty painless these days >> >> >> Thoughts? >> >> >> - Wes >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pandas-dev mailing list >> >> Pandas-dev at python.org >> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pandas-dev >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: