Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #11017
| From | Ole Streicher <olebole@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.python |
| Subject | Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? |
| Date | 2018-10-16 10:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <wJsqK-1qy-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <wJrbj-LD-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJrkZ-OP-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJruF-S0-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJrEl-1aA-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <wJrO1-1dS-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
ghisvail@gmail.com writes: > Indeed. Note that NumPy has already published plans to become Python 3 > only in the near future, so the deprecation of Python 2 in the > scientific stack will happen eventually. > > I just don't think it should be rushed into the Buster release cycle. If we really want to then have a Python-2-numpy, why can't there be a separate Python-2 legacy numpy source package? I do the same for astropy. Holding back normal updates especially for science packages just because we don't want to use a modern numpy/scipy/matplotlib stack is not really friendly to our users, which (in science) rely on at least "somehow" modern software. And astropy that is more than a 1.5 years old already at the release of Buster would not be accepted by the users, and patching it to use an older sw stack is also impractical. Even when we /still/ support Python 2, our focus and preference should be clearly Python 3. Best regards Ole
Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Steffen Möller <steffen.moeller@uni-rostock.de> - 2018-10-15 23:10 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 08:40 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2018-10-16 08:50 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 09:00 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> - 2018-10-16 09:10 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 09:20 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Ole Streicher <olebole@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 10:00 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 10:30 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Arto Jantunen <viiru@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 11:00 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 11:20 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Arto Jantunen <viiru@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 11:30 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Michael Hudson-Doyle <michael.hudson@canonical.com> - 2018-10-16 12:10 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Steffen Möller <steffen.moeller@uni-rostock.de> - 2018-10-16 10:40 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 10:50 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Steffen Möller <steffen_moeller@gmx.de> - 2018-10-16 10:50 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? ghisvail@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 11:10 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? "W. Martin Borgert" <debacle@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 14:00 +0200
Re: Matplotlib 3.0 - update ok? Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2018-10-16 14:40 +0200
csiph-web