matplotlib-devel Mailing List for matplotlib

On 2012年12月16日 9:21 AM, Damon McDougall wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Jason Grout
> <jas...@cr...> wrote:
>> On 12/14/12 10:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>> sourceforge's horror of an interface.
>>
>> I'll second that. Every time I go to Sourceforge, I have to figure out
>> how in the world to download what I want (and I have to figure out which
>> things *not* to click on too).
>
> Ok sounds like there is a reasonable amount of resistance towards Sourceforge.
>
> Eric, when you suggest that NumFocus could 'provide hosting directly',
> do you mean they would have the physical hardware to host the files,
> or are you suggesting they provide the finances to seek hosting
> elsewhere?
I was thinking that perhaps NumFocus would be running a server that 
could provide the hosting. Funding for an external service is also 
possible, though, and might make more sense.
>
> In the GitHub blog post, they suggest using S3. We could try that.
> It's fairly inexpensive and the first year is free (within monthly
> bandwidth limits). We could try it for a year and see how that pans
> out? I'm not entirely sure how the Amazon stuff works but I've heard
> good things about it.
>
The github page https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/downloads shows 
44,000 downloads for the 1.2 tarball, so I don't think the 20,000 
downloads per month limit of the free tier would work.
Eric

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Todd <tod...@gm...> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Damon McDougall <dam...@gm...>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Jason Grout
>> <jas...@cr...> wrote:
>> > On 12/14/12 10:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> >> sourceforge's horror of an interface.
>> >
>> > I'll second that. Every time I go to Sourceforge, I have to figure out
>> > how in the world to download what I want (and I have to figure out which
>> > things *not* to click on too).
>>
>> Ok sounds like there is a reasonable amount of resistance towards
>> Sourceforge.
>>
>> Eric, when you suggest that NumFocus could 'provide hosting directly',
>> do you mean they would have the physical hardware to host the files,
>> or are you suggesting they provide the finances to seek hosting
>> elsewhere?
>>
>> In the GitHub blog post, they suggest using S3. We could try that.
>> It's fairly inexpensive and the first year is free (within monthly
>> bandwidth limits). We could try it for a year and see how that pans
>> out? I'm not entirely sure how the Amazon stuff works but I've heard
>> good things about it.
>>
>>
> Are you sure the monthly bandwidth limits are sufficient?
>
> Also, have you talked to the pypi people about making exceptions for really
> popular projects? If critical packages like numpy, scipy, and matplotlib
> cannot use pypi, that seems like a major failing of the system.
Here's the pricing: http://aws.amazon.com/s3/#pricing. The free tier
programme limits are on there too. Unfortunately, I do not have the
knowledge to be able to say whether we would hit that or not.
Matt, have you had experienced comitting binaries to the gh-pages
branch? Are there size limits?
-- 
Damon McDougall
http://www.damon-is-a-geek.com
Institute for Computational Engineering Sciences
201 E. 24th St.
Stop C0200
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712-1229

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Damon McDougall
<dam...@gm...>wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Jason Grout
> <jas...@cr...> wrote:
> > On 12/14/12 10:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> >> sourceforge's horror of an interface.
> >
> > I'll second that. Every time I go to Sourceforge, I have to figure out
> > how in the world to download what I want (and I have to figure out which
> > things *not* to click on too).
>
> Ok sounds like there is a reasonable amount of resistance towards
> Sourceforge.
>
> Eric, when you suggest that NumFocus could 'provide hosting directly',
> do you mean they would have the physical hardware to host the files,
> or are you suggesting they provide the finances to seek hosting
> elsewhere?
>
> In the GitHub blog post, they suggest using S3. We could try that.
> It's fairly inexpensive and the first year is free (within monthly
> bandwidth limits). We could try it for a year and see how that pans
> out? I'm not entirely sure how the Amazon stuff works but I've heard
> good things about it.
>
>
> Are you sure the monthly bandwidth limits are sufficient?
Also, have you talked to the pypi people about making exceptions for really
popular projects? If critical packages like numpy, scipy, and matplotlib
cannot use pypi, that seems like a major failing of the system.

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Jason Grout
<jas...@cr...> wrote:
> On 12/14/12 10:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> sourceforge's horror of an interface.
>
> I'll second that. Every time I go to Sourceforge, I have to figure out
> how in the world to download what I want (and I have to figure out which
> things *not* to click on too).
Ok sounds like there is a reasonable amount of resistance towards Sourceforge.
Eric, when you suggest that NumFocus could 'provide hosting directly',
do you mean they would have the physical hardware to host the files,
or are you suggesting they provide the finances to seek hosting
elsewhere?
In the GitHub blog post, they suggest using S3. We could try that.
It's fairly inexpensive and the first year is free (within monthly
bandwidth limits). We could try it for a year and see how that pans
out? I'm not entirely sure how the Amazon stuff works but I've heard
good things about it.
-- 
Damon McDougall
http://www.damon-is-a-geek.com
Institute for Computational Engineering Sciences
201 E. 24th St.
Stop C0200
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712-1229

On 12/14/12 10:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> sourceforge's horror of an interface.
I'll second that. Every time I go to Sourceforge, I have to figure out 
how in the world to download what I want (and I have to figure out which 
things *not* to click on too).
Thanks,
Jason

Hi,
> Github has removed the ability to host binaries. They've removed this
> feature without any apparent notification except on their blog saying
> "it's gone today". And the suggested alternative is to use paid services.
>
> https://github.com/blog/1302-goodbye-uploads
>
> I had planned to complete our set of 1.2.0 binaries with a Python 3.2
> from Russell Owen in the near future. So much for that.
>
> Any thoughts? Do we go back to Sourceforge for our download hosting?
> Is anyone familiar with any other services? Do we try to piggy-back on
> what other scipy projects are doing?
Why not use a gh-pages branch to host both docs and binary files from github?
--Matt Newville

On 2012年12月14日 6:58 AM, Michael Droettboom wrote:
> Github has removed the ability to host binaries. They've removed this
> feature without any apparent notification except on their blog saying
> "it's gone today". And the suggested alternative is to use paid services.
>
> https://github.com/blog/1302-goodbye-uploads
>
> I had planned to complete our set of 1.2.0 binaries with a Python 3.2
> from Russell Owen in the near future. So much for that.
>
> Any thoughts? Do we go back to Sourceforge for our download hosting?
> Is anyone familiar with any other services? Do we try to piggy-back on
> what other scipy projects are doing?
>
> Mike
Mike,
It doesn't sound like any of the standard alternatives is very suitable. 
 Maybe Numfocus could provide the hosting directly?
Eric