[SciPy-dev] Technology Previews and Sphinx Docstring Annotations

[Nathan Bell]

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Anne Archibald
<aarchiba at physics.mcgill.ca> wrote:
>
> If people want to make the scikits option reasonable, I suggest,
> instead of arguing on the mailing list, going out and getting things
> set up so it really is easy to add packages. *Then* come back and tell
> us how it's a better option than what we have now. In the meantime, we
> can either go on with the approach we have - live with occasional API
> breakage for new components of scipy - or spend an evening getting
> scipy.preview set up.
>

I completely agree.  Scikits is not a viable incubator at the moment.

IMO that someone is willing to maintain a submodule of SciPy is far
more important than matters of API stability.

I'd argue that scipy.spatial should exist in SciPy 0.7 so people
actually use the thing.  A disclaimer in the docstring is sufficient
warning.  Those that ignore the warning are still better off than they
would have been without the code in the first place.

-- 
Nathan Bell wnbell at gmail.com
http://graphics.cs.uiuc.edu/~wnbell/