You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Since there is a lot of code that we may not want in the main repository, does it make sense to have more than one additional repository? For exmaple, pymc-experimental may just include methods that are not fully developed, tested and trusted, while code that is known to work well and has adequate test coverage could reside in a pymc-extras (or similar) repository.
The trade-off here seems to be around ease of use; package count; pymc stability; and pymc maintenance burden.
IMHO: one additional repo should be enough; tests etc should be a requirement of pymc-experimental just as for pymc; indeed, once the maintainers are satisfied with a feature stability, the code should require no further development to just lift straight into pymc.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
ReadMe:
The trade-off here seems to be around ease of use; package count; pymc stability; and pymc maintenance burden.
IMHO: one additional repo should be enough; tests etc should be a requirement of
pymc-experimental
just as forpymc
; indeed, once the maintainers are satisfied with a feature stability, the code should require no further development to just lift straight intopymc
.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions