Closed arsenovic closed 8 years ago
+1, because I fear it is a little too domain-specific to be merged into matplotlib. However, in scikit-rf, it would be perfect!
Also +1. However, I think that this module is useful in its own right and should continue to be maintained. Implementation-wise, I would tend to favor an approach that makes PySmithPlot a dependency.
I agree, Matthew. As pySmithPlot 'just' does plotting, it could have a rather stable and small API, that is then called upon by scikit-rf.
For easy_installing of this dependency, should pySmithPlot then maybe be transformed in scikit-smithplot? What does the author of pySmithPlot think? Under what license would he like to publish his work?
If you are interested in integrating it into scikit, you are welcome. I dont really have time in the near future to take care of the project. I know the code is bad documented and has some ugly constructions, but it worked for me in most cases. Most of the code is for automatic creating an efficient and fancy grid. About the license, i haven't thought about it yet. I think i would prefer something like LGPL.
I can contribute some effort if any of you need help
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Paul Staerke notifications@github.comwrote:
If you are interested in integrating it into scikit, you are welcome. I dont really have time in the near future to take care of the project. I know the code is bad documented and has some ugly constructions, but it worked for me in most cases. Most of the code is for automatic creating an efficient and fancy grid. About the license, i haven't thought about it yet. I think i would prefer something like LGPL.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/vMeijin/pySmithPlot/issues/1#issuecomment-33864724 .
@vMeijin , your license is briefly stated here as gpl https://github.com/vMeijin/pySmithPlot/blob/master/smithplot/smithaxes.py#L1643
scikit-rf license recently changed to BSD, which is consistent with matplotlib/scipy/numpy/pandas. i think to merge the codebase we would need your permission to change the license ( once its merged) or keep it as a dependency and develop it modularly. this will probably change the way we go about integrating it.
@hyzhaogogle thanks for the offer. we could definitely use the help. lets talk about this when we hear back from @vMeijin ,
I second the recommendation of BSD for consistency with the ecosystem, but it's clearly your decision to make.
I think I can life with BSD. I will change the copyright information in the source.
I just uploaded a new version. Maybe someone at scikit-rf will find interest in it and contacts me.
this package is great. we should find a way to merge its functionality into scikit-rf https://github.com/scikit-rf/scikit-rf