Skip to content
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

Fix deprecations #325

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Fix deprecations #325

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

femtocleaner[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@femtocleaner femtocleaner bot commented Aug 8, 2017

I fixed a number of deprecations for you

@ararslan
Copy link
Member

ararslan commented Aug 8, 2017

Not a fault of the bot, but the comment above that explicitly says that @recipe doesn't yet support where, so this change isn't valid.

@ararslan ararslan closed this Aug 8, 2017
@ararslan ararslan deleted the fbot/deps branch August 8, 2017 23:47
@iblislin
Copy link
Collaborator

iblislin commented Aug 9, 2017

JuliaPlots/RecipesBase.jl#22
master of RecipesBase already supported it.

@ararslan
Copy link
Member

ararslan commented Aug 9, 2017

There hasn't been a tag of RecipesBase that includes the change though. When that happens we can make the where change here and bump the minimum version of RecipesBase in REQUIRE to the version that correctly handles where.

Though that brings me to a general gripe of mine with this package: It shouldn't depend on a piece of one particular plotting stack. It would be better to separate the plotting of time series out of this package, though I'm not sure how best to do that. That's an aside though.

@iblislin
Copy link
Collaborator

iblislin commented Aug 9, 2017

There hasn't been a tag of RecipesBase that includes the change though. When that happens we can make the where change here and bump the minimum version of RecipesBase in REQUIRE to the version that correctly handles where.

I'm waiting it for being widely tested.
JuliaPlots/RecipesBase.jl#23 (comment)

Though that brings me to a general gripe of mine with this package: It shouldn't depend on a piece of one particular plotting stack. It would be better to separate the plotting of time series out of this package, though I'm not sure how best to do that. That's an aside though.

IMO, I prefer a single, versatile repo.
I also think RecipesBase.jl is quite stable. I'm fine with depending on it.

RecipesBase

@ararslan
Copy link
Member

ararslan commented Aug 9, 2017

My problem with depending on a particular piece of one plotting stack is that it makes it easy to plot with that stack but not with others. As an example, RecipesBase is exclusive to Plots.jl and its ecosystem, but I plot almost exclusively in Gadfly. I don't doubt that RecipesBase is stable, it seems unfair for a more general package to be opinionated about how you should plot things. But maybe that's just me.

@iblislin
Copy link
Collaborator

iblislin commented Aug 9, 2017

I'm sorry for letting you feel uncomfortable about Plots.jl only in current state.
Merging something from TimeSeriesTools.jl is in my personal overflowed todo stack...
e.g. https://github.com/GordStephen/TimeSeriesTools.jl/blob/master/src/visualizations.jl

What I want is managing to embrace more ecosystems if possible! And I want all of them are gathered in the same repo instead of spilling features into lots of repos; we can do well integration testing/upgrading.
so... i'm curious about that optional dependency is possiable or not, something like try: import ... in Python. That will allow us to build something like a plugin system. User just choose the ecosystem they like, plug and play.

@ararslan
Copy link
Member

ararslan commented Aug 9, 2017

Optional dependencies are definitely the way to go here (and elsewhere), the problem is that there's no direct support for them in Julia yet. 🙁

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants