Skip to content

Conversation

timhoffm
Copy link
Member

@timhoffm timhoffm commented Feb 6, 2025

Closes #17339 by addressing the remaining open issue #17339 (comment).

@github-actions github-actions bot added topic: geometry manager LayoutEngine, Constrained layout, Tight layout Documentation: user guide files in galleries/users_explain or doc/users labels Feb 6, 2025
@timhoffm timhoffm added this to the v3.10.1 milestone Feb 6, 2025
@timhoffm
Copy link
Member Author

timhoffm commented Feb 6, 2025

Likely yes.

Can we go as far as discouraging tight_layout?

@rcomer
Copy link
Member

rcomer commented Feb 6, 2025

According to the User Guide menu, it is already mildly discouraged

image

@timhoffm timhoffm added the status: needs comment/discussion needs consensus on next step label Feb 14, 2025
@ksunden ksunden modified the milestones: v3.10.1, v3.10.2 Feb 21, 2025
Co-authored-by: Mecanerd <joshdonath23@hotmail.com>
@jklymak
Copy link
Member

jklymak commented Feb 27, 2025

Well, I'd merge, but merging is blocked by the bot. Which is pretty annoying to be honest. Why do we need a bot to tell us whether we are allowed to merge or not?

@timhoffm timhoffm removed the status: needs comment/discussion needs consensus on next step label Feb 27, 2025
@timhoffm
Copy link
Member Author

We block merging if the label „needs comment/discussion“ is set. IMHO that makes sense because it prevents premature merging when there are still to be discussed aspects.

I had set this mover the question whether tight-layout should be formally discouraged. But that‘s also something we can discuss later/separately. My focus in this PR is to guide users by stating preference between tight-layout and constrained-layout. Therefore, I’ve removed the label.

Co-authored-by: Ruth Comer <10599679+rcomer@users.noreply.github.com>
@rcomer rcomer merged commit 293eff8 into matplotlib:main Feb 28, 2025
37 of 40 checks passed
meeseeksmachine pushed a commit to meeseeksmachine/matplotlib that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2025
@timhoffm timhoffm deleted the doc-layout branch February 28, 2025 13:50
rcomer added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2025
…584-on-v3.10.x

Backport PR #29584 on branch v3.10.x (DOC: Recommend constrained_layout over tight_layout)
@ksunden ksunden mentioned this pull request May 9, 2025
5 tasks
@ksunden ksunden mentioned this pull request Aug 7, 2025
5 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Documentation: user guide files in galleries/users_explain or doc/users topic: geometry manager LayoutEngine, Constrained layout, Tight layout
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Clarify that constrained_layout and tight_layout conflict with each other
6 participants