PR: Remove/update outdated refs to Mac OS X, Mac DMG installers and Continuum.io #5979
Conversation
doc/installation.rst
Outdated
|
|
||
| The minimal version to run our DMG's is Mavericks (10.9) since | ||
| Spyder 2.3.5. Previous versions work on Lion (10.7) or higher. | ||
| +Thanks to the Spyder team and `Continuum <http://www.continuum.io/>`_, Spyder is included |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please change Continuum to Anaconda Inc. Also, its webpage is
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, done. I had just carried it over from the current revision.
doc/installation.rst
Outdated
| The minimal version to run our DMG's is Mavericks (10.9) since | ||
| Spyder 2.3.5. Previous versions work on Lion (10.7) or higher. | ||
| +Thanks to the Spyder team and `Continuum <http://www.continuum.io/>`_, Spyder is included | ||
| +in the `Anaconda <http://continuum.io/downloads.html>`_ Python distribution. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This URL also needs to be updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done, thanks. Also updated the similarly outdated URL for the Windows version, assuming that's in scope as well.
ccordoba12
changed the title
I don't understand too well what do you mean by this, so please open a new PR about it. |
|
Given it was an update to the same section and in a similar vein as the previous, and perhaps too small for a separate PR, I figured it might be in scope to update the deprecated Mac OS X name to the current macOS as well. Works for you? |
Sure. To keep things clean and avoid merge conflicts (it would involve a change on the same line as the updated Windows Anaconda URL), should I just wait until this is merged to formally open that PR? Also, is it necessary to open an issue as well, for completeness? Also, Anaconda is available for Linux and may be an easier option but isn't listed there, just distribution-specific methods. Should a similar bullet/subsection mentioning it as an option be added to that section? That would also be a separate PR I would assume? |
CAM-Gerlach
changed the title
Sure, I'll merge it as soon our CIs finish.
Nop, don't worry about it. |
Ok, please do that too, in the same PR you're going to your other changes. |
|
@ccordoba12 Interesting. Here it says all checks have passed, but on the AppVeyor page it makes clear that only the Python 2.7 check has passed, and shows the Python 3.6 currently running about 60s in. Bug? Also, out of an abundance of curiosity, how does it work forward-porting this into EDIT: This was a few minutes later, still not done. And yet: |
|
Ready to go with the other PR as soon as this gets merged; all checks are good to go. Also, curious about the AppVeyor status reporting inconsistency; I'll watch for whether it reoccurs on my next PR. If so, should one of us submit a bug report to someone? If confirmed, that could potentially mislead maintainers to think all builds passed when only the first one did; if something causes the 3.6 build to fail that doesn't affect 2.7 (and isn't caught by the other tests), then bad code could get merged without anyone knowing. |
|
^_^ Prepping number 3 now... |
|
@CAM-Gerlach, I'll send you a message on Gitter. You'll receive a notification about it in your email. It's just to talk with you privately :-) |
|
Sure thing. |
|
I don't know why but Gitter doesn't allow me to start a conversation with you. Could you write me an email instead? My address is in my profile. |
|
Sent. |
|
@ccordoba12 Reply sent, just FYI—there was some problem sending it at first so want to make sure it got through. |
Fixes #5978
First PR, but figured it was good to start small...hopefully I haven't messed too much stuff up. Removed the outdated references to the Mac DMG installers that are apparently no longer offered, to fix issue #5978 .
Also, as a tangentially related general formatting note (I didn't modify anything to this effect here, of course), it might make more sense to replace the numbers with bullets or (perhaps better yet) just simple headings under the Linux section, as they don't represent a sequential list of steps nor an ordered list of preferable alternatives, as a numbered list would imply. If its important enough, I can make another PR to do so.