[yt-dev] na => np in 3.0 and 2.x

[Matthew Turk]

Hi all,

Okay, looks like everybody's pretty much in favor.  Anthony, would it
be possible to run the script on the tip of the 2.x repository and
issue a PR for that?  And, do we want to merge to stable so that any
big bug fixes get applied there before doing so?

-Matt

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
> Nearly everyone who has replied so far is on board with the third
> option, which is to apply the same change to both.  Anthony and Kacper
> also had a discussion in the PR about the cosmology routines, which
> seem to be (!!!) non-functional in some particular configurations of
> the universe.  I'll suggest that we wait until Wednesday, and if
> nobody objects by then, we accept this PR and then also a similar one
> for the dev branch.  I'd prefer we not apply these changes to the
> stable branch at this time.
>
> In IRC, Martin Geisler also pointed me at these StackOverflow
> questions which address merges and workflows like this:
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/9533927/110204
> http://stackoverflow.com/a/9500764/110204
>
> In short, by applying to both, we're going to be okay.  :)
>
> -Matt
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Anthony Scopatz <scopatz at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Obviously, I am +1 for #3 and +0 on #2 (no need to create a maintenance
>> headache if you don't have to).  I originally did this in the 3.0 fork just
>> because
>> I thought it was more of a sandbox than the 2.x series.  I am also +0 on #1,
>> if that is what is best.
>>
>> Be Well
>> Anthony
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Kacper Kowalik <xarthisius.kk at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 27.08.2012 16:08, Matthew Turk wrote:
>>> > Because this could be disruptive for any major, outstanding forks, I
>>> > also think it needs to be discussed here.  (I'm actually kind of -1 on
>>> > big discussions happening in pull requests.)  My vote is for #3.  I'd
>>> > rather get this over with, since we all know it probably ought to
>>> > happen at some point in the future.
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> there's a way to minimize the disruption on any outstanding forks,
>>> namely to automate the process. If we use the same "tool" on both main
>>> repo and the fork, the difference should be close to none.
>>> In this case something along the lines:
>>>
>>> find . -name "*.py" \
>>>    -exec sed -e "s/\([[:punct:]]\|[[:space:]]\)na\./\1np\./g" \
>>>    -e "s/numpy as na/numpy as np/g" -i {} \;
>>>
>>> should do the trick. I haven't check yet if that reproduces Anthony's PR
>>> so use it carefully ;)
>>> Cheers,
>>> Kacper
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>