[Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch

[Matthew Turk]

Hi Sam,

> Definitely.  I'm working on it right now actually.  I've nearly finished
> cleaning out the bugs from the merge with the yt (2.0) branch, and once
> that's done I'll get going on the docs.  Since my original kd-rendering
> branch was a branch off of what became "stable", there is a big merge
> changeset in there.  What I plan on doing is finishing the merge/docs today
> or tomorrow, and pushing the kd-rendering branch.  I don't quite feel
> comfortable merging that and the yt branch together, so I'll probably look
> for some help from Matt to make sure that it's all getting done the right
> way.

Cool!  I'm happy to help out.

I think the docs need a restructuring.  Britton and I took a swing at
this a while back, but I think I'm going to wait until changes to the
yt-doc repo are finished and then have another go.  Here's a list of
my notes on this, for what it's worth:

http://yt.enzotools.org/wiki/DocumentationNotes

I'm really unsatisfied with them, and trying to come up with a new
mechanism for approaching new users and then the transition from
beginning user to advanced user has stumped me.

> The other option I see to "closing" the kd-rendering branch is to just add
> the functionality to the yt branch without going through the merging
> process.  Since the kd-tree stuff is mostly additions, the only merging has
> to do with camera.py and a function or two in
> the parallel_analysis_interface, this wouldn't be that difficult.  So, the
> question is: would you all (mostly Matt) rather just get rid of the
> kd-rendering branch and have me add what is needed to the "yt" branch or
> would you rather have me commit the rather huge merges, possibly making the
> stable->yt merge more complicated.  I'm happy doing either.
> Anyways, I'm looking forward to this migration, and I think after a couple
> of updates to various user scripts it should be a great improvement!
> Sam

I'll handle ditching the kd-render branch; if you want to go ahead and
just transplant your changes into the yt branch that'd be best.

Awesome work, Sam.

-Matt

> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Stephen Skory <stephenskory at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> > Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> Nothing specific, except that I support this idea. I've been bugging Sam
>> to integrate his volume rendering stuff into the development branch (and
>> write docs for it simultaneously), so that stuff may be ready for release by
>> then (Sam?). I would also like to point out that we will have to go through
>> the docs and change the examples, in addition to the conversion rubric Matt
>> wrote about.
>>
>>
>> Stephen Skory
>> stephenskory at yahoo.com
>> http://stephenskory.com/
>> 510.621.3687 (google voice)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yt-dev mailing list
>> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
>
> --
> Samuel W. Skillman
> DOE Computational Science Graduate Fellow
> Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy
> University of Colorado at Boulder
> samuel.skillman[at]colorado.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yt-dev mailing list
> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>