[SciPy-dev] Proposal: scipy.sandbox

[Pearu Peterson]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Fernando Perez wrote:

> Pearu Peterson wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
>>> Note that xxx could probably use a bit of updating to reflect the current 
>>> state of scipy.  But even as it is, it's a useful starter for new package 
>>> authors, and sandbox is probably the right place for it.
>> 
>> 
>> I would rename xxx to example or expackage or smth like that.
>> And it really needs updated to current scipy.distutils. I would not 
>> recommend it for starter, instead, one should look at newcore setup.py 
>> files when creating a new package.
>
> +1 on the renaming.  My point was that the basic idea of a subdirectory that 
> new users can copy wholesale to get started when writing a new package is a 
> good one.  It lowers the barrier for new contributors, as they can just copy 
> that and start renaming and deleting what they don't need, and be up and 
> running quickly.  It is harder (for a newcomer) to try to extract from the 
> full tree the relevant bits, since they won't know what's critical and what 
> isn't.  That's why I see value in a standalone minimal example package, 
> perhaps I wasn't clear enough originally.

It was clear enough for me. I just wanted to make sure that new 
contributors (many people have offered help recently) would not look into
xxx as it is now.

> I suspected it was out of date, esp. with respect to the advances in 
> scipy.distutils, but I think with a bit of cleanup/updating it can be a 
> useful piece, especially as we try to make the whole of scipy more friendly 
> towards modularization efforts.

Sure.

Pearu