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
I agree a better long-term path is to add a real-only option to scipy, but that's not pending, and would also require advancing pvlib's scipy to scipy's latest.
If #2723 is not merged, the loss is limited to slower performance with scipy's current lambertw.
Activity
cwhanse commentedon Mar 31, 2026
RDaxini commentedon Apr 1, 2026
Suggestion:
kandersolar commentedon Apr 1, 2026
iotoolstest failures with pandas 3 #2728cwhanse commentedon Apr 2, 2026
#2723 or no? Or, hold for 0.15.2?
I agree a better long-term path is to add a real-only option to scipy, but that's not pending, and would also require advancing pvlib's scipy to scipy's latest.
If #2723 is not merged, the loss is limited to slower performance with scipy's current lambertw.
RDaxini commentedon Apr 14, 2026
let's add #2733. Do we have a planned release date?
kandersolar commentedon Apr 15, 2026
There is no planned date. Getting the mentioned PRs merged, or kicking them to the next release, is the plan.