Hi Anton, To be clear I am not against adding SymPy to SPEC 0. I just want to understand what this means in practice. Presumably if SymPy is added there then people will have some expectation that it means something somehow.
I don't really know how to answer the question "which versions of SymPy should I try to support within my package that has SymPy as a dependency" because I am not sure what the benefit would be of supporting more than 1 version of SymPy. Is there a reason that someone would need to combine a newer version of your package with an older version of SymPy? Oscar On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 at 15:18, Anton Akhmerov <anton.akhme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Oscar, > > I want to be able to answer a question: "which versions of SymPy should I try > to support within my package that has SymPy as a dependency". It doesn't make > a big difference whether this question is answered by SPEC 0 or by SymPy > itself, except for SPEC 0 being a central point of reference. I realized that > SymPy has no support cycle, but I think the question is still useful > regardless. > > Anton > On Sunday 10 March 2024 at 15:48:13 UTC+1 Oscar wrote: >> >> Hi Anton, >> >> What difference does it make to you in practice whether or not SymPy >> is listed in SPEC 0? >> >> SymPy does not really support old versions with maintenance releases >> so it does not really have a "support cycle" in the sense that SPEC 0 >> seems to describe. There can be a bugfix release shortly after a >> feature release to fix some obvious regressions but that is basically >> it. >> >> SymPy itself broadly tries to have wide version support for other >> packages like numpy just because without listing them as hard >> dependencies there is no way to indicate which versions sympy is >> compatible with. There is no way to put version constraints on >> optional dependencies in pip/PyPI land. >> >> Oscar >> >> On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 at 14:24, Anton Akhmerov <anton.a...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > There is now SPEC 0, a SciPy-community-wide standard for versions of >> > different packages that developers should aim supporting, see >> > https://scientific-python.org/specs/spec-0000/ >> > >> > I believe Sympy is the biggest package missing from SPEC 0, and I've asked >> > the maintainers of SPEC 0 what is the best way to proceed >> > (https://discuss.scientific-python.org/t/spec-0-include-sympy/975?u=akhmerov). >> > They appear to welcome the idea and recommended to reach out via this >> > mailing list. >> > >> > So here's the question I'd like to know (as someone authoring software >> > that depends on Sympy): would Sympy like to join SPEC 0? >> > >> > Thank you for your consideration, >> > Anton >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> > "sympy" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> > email to sympy+un...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/e21d2db6-8ac4-4b01-a92c-7e49eb591146n%40googlegroups.com. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sympy" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/abcea775-f3aa-45c0-883e-ceec9482cc6cn%40googlegroups.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAHVvXxRk_ZZmbXig0fTJ3rQ_dn0Ecu4FfO_Nv9qG%3Dzd9Jy8AWg%40mail.gmail.com.
