-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
MAINT: additional SciPy 1.5.2 backports #12596
MAINT: additional SciPy 1.5.2 backports #12596
Conversation
* CI: Add GCC 4.8 entry to travis build matrix * CI: Fix native code coverage on travis
Cython now complains if the types of the two branches in the ternary statement do not match (here 1D vs 2D).
* update SciPy `1.5.2` release notes following a second round of backports after the first attempt at wheel builds failed
@@ -122,8 +122,19 @@ matrix: | |||
- NUMPYSPEC="numpy==1.17.4" | |||
- USE_SDIST=1 | |||
- python: 3.6 | |||
if: type = pull_request | |||
name: "Wheel, Optimised, GCC 4.8" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the test incantation command is different on the older branch it seems.. since it included a COVERAGE entry already I left it alone, but not sure what will happen..
@@ -861,7 +861,11 @@ def from_euler(cls, seq, angles, degrees=False): | |||
"num_axes), got {}.".format(angles.shape)) | |||
|
|||
quat = _elementary_quat_compose(seq, angles, intrinsic) | |||
return cls(quat[0] if is_single else quat, normalize=False, copy=False) | |||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The quat
object above may be slightly different vs. the one Thomas patched on master
because of seq.encode()
I think that's fine. |
CI is all-green, no objections, backport PR so merging. |
1.5.2
failed, so a few more backports are added here:seq.encode()
before/after difference vs.master
I think)v1.5.2
tag was never pushed, but the remotemaintenance/1.5.x
branch is protected , I've opted to delete thev1.5.2
tag locally and it will most likely be reassigned to a non-REL
commit (i.e., the most recent commit at release prepartion time, which might be the merge commit from this PR when it is ready)1.5.2
release notes to reflect the additional backports included here