In article <513...@st...>, Michael Droettboom <md...@st...> wrote: > On 03/07/2013 06:48 PM, Russell E. Owen wrote: > > In article <513...@st...>, > > Michael Droettboom <md...@st...> > > wrote: > > > >> We've finally squashed all of the bugs slated for 1.2.1, so I have > >> tagged a 1.2.1rc1 for testing.... > >> > >> It can be downloaded from the SF files server here: > >> > >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/matplotlib/files/matplotlib/matplotlib-1.2. > >> 1rc > >> 1/matplotlib-1.2.1rc1.tar.gz/download > >>... > > I uploaded two Mac binaries to SourceForge... > > > > They are both built against numpy 1.6.2, which is not ideal, but is the > > best I can do at the moment. > > > I think that's fine for now -- for the rc it's most important to just > make sure that working packages *can* be built. We can reevaluate what > Numpy version to use for the final release, and let me know if we should > push back the final release date to accomodate rejiggering your > development environment etc. Do you have an opinion on the best numpy to use for matplotlib 1.2 binaries? Some considerations: I think numpy 1.7.x is binary compatible with 1.6.x. If so, surely it is OK to build matplotlib against numpy 1.6.x, even if a user wants to use numpy 1.7.x? I have not tested this (nor the reverse direction). numpy 1.7.0 has a serious memory leak (though I don't know how many users would ever see it). 1.7.1 is due out fairly soon. Personally I would rather skip 1.7.0 on my own machine. Yet it would be wise to let 1.7.1 be used for a week or two before relying on it and I'd hate to hold up release of matplotlib 1.2.1. -- Russell