[Bug 220766] Review Request: ScientificPython - a collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: ScientificPython -  a collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220766





------- Additional Comments From jspaleta at gmail.com  2006-12-27 15:08 EST -------
(In reply to comment #2)
I'll clean up the descriptive tag crap before I submit.

> shouldn't the sub packages be a dependency of the ScientificPython package ?
> 

No, its the other way around.  Subpackages depend on the main package.  I broke
these out as sub-packages specifically because they drag in additional
requirements which may or may not be needed and as a result they should be
optional. This is a codebase aimed at people writing homebrew scientific
simulation code, not an end-user application. I expect everyone using this to
have enough grey matter to look for subpackages as needed.  I've no desire to
delibrately force all subpackages to install dragging in tk and qt and openmpi
on every system, systems which be delibrately streamlined for batched scientific
computing. You'll notice this sort of thing is already done for
python-matplotlib and python-matplotlib-tk so I'm not setting a precendent here. 

> you missed Doc/BSP_Tutorial.pdf in ScientificPython-doc package

Crap thats suppose to be in -BSP subpackage, I missed it when I split off BSP.
I'm on the fence about the BSP stuff in general because libBSP is not available
in Fedora yet. I'm not even sure what the licensing conditions on libBSP are. 
The only reason I'm including the BSP python modules at all is because
ScientificPython includes a virtual BSP utility which allows you to simulate the
use of the BSP protocal on a single processor without the need of libBSP. Cute,
but I'm not sure how useful packaging that actually is. Since I've no experience
with libBSP installs yet I wasn't going to hold up packaging ScientificPython
for this optional functionality. I'm primarily interested in the provided netCDF
support, and secondarily the mpi support.  I probably need to add a
README.Fedora to the -bsp subpackage stating that the libBSP support isn't
available yet.


-jef

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.