matplotlib-devel Mailing List for matplotlib

2011年1月23日 Benjamin Root <ben...@ou...>:
> Btw, if Friedrich hasn't been made a developer
> yet, he has my vote (if he wants it).
I feel very much honoured by this, it is a great belated Christmas
gift, so I like it very much that you speak up for me, but currently I
don't feel like a "core dev". Maybe, when matplotlib-filters
(formerly matplotlib-grayscale) is through and committed, maybe then
I'm confident enough.
Best,
Friedrich

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Darren Dale <dsd...@gm...> wrote:
> That said, I would be more comfortable saying "lets do this" if I heard from
> more of the debate that the drop looks ok.
In case anyone was wondering, that was the result of the android spell
checker, not alzheimers.

On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Andrew Straw <str...@as...> wrote:
> On 23-Jan-11 04:05, John Hunter wrote:
>>
>> Darren
>> if you are ready to "flip the switch" and make an official github repo
>> under this organization, go for it. Once we get the trunk active,
>> we'll worry about the rest, like migrating the release branch. Of
>> course, if Andrew as the original force to move to github, has any
>> comments or concerns, we're certainly receptive to them. But we have
>> a recent release out, the buildbot is broken currently anyhow, and
>> this looks like a perfect time to make the move.
>
> +1.
>
> And for what it's worth, I keep nagging the IT people at my new employer to
> set me up the virtual machines for the new buildslaves...
I need to improve the authorship mapping, so the authors of svn
commits will be identified using their git information in the new
repository. For the following svn accounts, I need "Real Name
<re...@em...o>" information as it will appear when committing to the
new git repository (not your old svn info, unless it will be the
same). Look in the [user] section of ~/.gitconfig, if you have one.
jdh2358
efiring
mdboom
mdehoon
jswhit
weathergod
leejjoon
jouni
jrevans
ryanmay
ianthomas23
cmoad
pivanov314
Please send it to me ASAP.

On 23-Jan-11 04:05, John Hunter wrote:
>
> Darren
> if you are ready to "flip the switch" and make an official github repo
> under this organization, go for it. Once we get the trunk active,
> we'll worry about the rest, like migrating the release branch. Of
> course, if Andrew as the original force to move to github, has any
> comments or concerns, we're certainly receptive to them. But we have
> a recent release out, the buildbot is broken currently anyhow, and
> this looks like a perfect time to make the move.
+1.
And for what it's worth, I keep nagging the IT people at my new employer 
to set me up the virtual machines for the new buildslaves...
-Andrew

On Saturday, January 22, 2011, John Hunter <jd...@gm...> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Eric Firing <ef...@ha...> wrote:
>> I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
>> there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
>> gatekeepers.
>
> I can add you -- any developer who currently has mpl commit privs,
> send me your github account name and I'll add you to the mpl
> organization. Although a gatekeeper model may have its merits. and
> you'd be a gatekeeper under any scenario, I prefer to keep our current
> developer model of a large number of trusted committers rather than a
> few gatekeepers.
>
> I'd be willing to reconsider this model in the face of persuasive
> argument *and* a few people willing to stand up and serve as patch
> reviewers and gatekeepers, but until then, I think we have to rely on
> good people making good contributions, in the presence of our unit
> tests and host of people serving as crash test dummies by running off
> HEAD....
>
> JDH
>
Somehow, I read that as "running with heads cut off"... It is late.
Anyway, I am willing to give a switchover a shot, and to continue the
current contrib model. Btw, if Friedrich hasn't been made a developer
yet, he has my vote (if he wants it).
Ben Root

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Eric Firing <ef...@ha...> wrote:
> I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
> there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
> gatekeepers.
I can add you -- any developer who currently has mpl commit privs,
send me your github account name and I'll add you to the mpl
organization. Although a gatekeeper model may have its merits. and
you'd be a gatekeeper under any scenario, I prefer to keep our current
developer model of a large number of trusted committers rather than a
few gatekeepers.
I'd be willing to reconsider this model in the face of persuasive
argument *and* a few people willing to stand up and serve as patch
reviewers and gatekeepers, but until then, I think we have to rely on
good people making good contributions, in the presence of our unit
tests and host of people serving as crash test dummies by running off
HEAD....
JDH

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Darren Dale <dsd...@gm...> wrote:
> Thanks Eric, that's encouraging. I am reasonably confident, but in the
> spirit of code review/cya, I would feel better if another dev chimed in that
> they were also reasonably confident without having to take my word for it.
I agree with Eric and others in favor of flipping the switch on the
trunk/matplotlib conversion to github. Michael and I made some
comments on an earlier thread that we were happy with the svn repo,
acknowledging that as core developers we were happy using a central
svn repo but understanding that for others without easy commit access,
a distributed repo might be preferable. So the original decision made
many moons ago to switch has never been questioned, it's just that for
many of the developers, it has not been a driving need. But we'll
gladly stand behind anyone willing to do the work.
There are subtleties and difficulties around the mpl svn directories
that depend on trunk/matplotlib: sample_data, basemap, sampledoc, etc.
 I think the solution is the one advocated above: just punt on it.
Let's convert the trunk and rely on good practice to keep the others
in sync. Ie, when basemap does a release, it can just tag the release
notes with "depends on matplotlib release XX or revision YY". Likewise
with sampledata, etc.
The official repo needs to be https://github.com/matplotlib, which is
the matplotlib organization. Darren is already a member, and it
looks like he has more bandwidth at this point than Andrew, so Darren
if you are ready to "flip the switch" and make an official github repo
under this organization, go for it. Once we get the trunk active,
we'll worry about the rest, like migrating the release branch. Of
course, if Andrew as the original force to move to github, has any
comments or concerns, we're certainly receptive to them. But we have
a recent release out, the buildbot is broken currently anyhow, and
this looks like a perfect time to make the move.
JDH

On Jan 22, 2011 9:06 PM, "Darren Dale" <dsd...@gm...> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 22, 2011 5:28 PM, "Matthew Brett" <mat...@gm...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > >> >> What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap's
data?
> > >> >
> > >> > Separate repo?
> >
> > I just fished up some previous discussions:
> >
> > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8275
> > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8461
> >
> > Do I remember correctly that a plan was needed to keep track of the
> > relationship of matplotlib-proper, the sample data and basemap, when
> > they are not part of the same repository?
>
> I think this could be done with a separate repo, using modules to pull in
the various components and keep the relationship in sync. I'm using modules
in one of my own projects, and have been satisfied with the way it works.
But we should really hear from the basemap devs, I don't know if they are on
board with a switch to git.
Damn spellchecker. That should read submodules, not modules.

On Jan 22, 2011 5:28 PM, "Matthew Brett" <mat...@gm...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> >> >> What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap's
data?
> >> >
> >> > Separate repo?
>
> I just fished up some previous discussions:
>
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8275
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8461
>
> Do I remember correctly that a plan was needed to keep track of the
> relationship of matplotlib-proper, the sample data and basemap, when
> they are not part of the same repository?
I think this could be done with a separate repo, using modules to pull in
the various components and keep the relationship in sync. I'm using modules
in one of my own projects, and have been satisfied with the way it works.
But we should really hear from the basemap devs, I don't know if they are on
board with a switch to git.