[yt-dev] Release 2.5?
Christopher Moody
cemoody at ucsc.edu
Fri Oct 12 14:24:16 PDT 2012
I think this got sidelined in the midst of other talk about testing, but
coordinating project tracking with JIRA looks great.
+1 to JIRA
chris
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Sam Skillman <samskillman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Mike,
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Michael Kuhlen <mqk at astro.berkeley.edu>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Jeff
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> Holy crap, I didn't realize
> >> >>
> >> >> pip install yt
> >> >>
> >> >> was a goal! that would be awesome.
> >> >
> >> > In that case you may be interested in this ubuntu PPA I made a little
> >> > while
> >> > ago, for yt (2.4) and yt-devel (2.5):
> >> > https://launchpad.net/~kuhlen/+archive/ppa
> >> >
> >> > The current version of yt-devel is based on changeset 467f57b (from
> >> > 08/24).
> >> > I need to update it...
> >>
> >> I completely forgot to update the web page! I will do this either
> >> tomorrow or Thursday (although if anybody wants to issue a pull
> >> request to the website with the info, it can be redeployed asap.)
> >> Thank you again for doing this!
> >>
> >> I think the PPA, Kacper's ebuild, having pip install work, and TomR's
> >> MacPorts are all really, really good reasons to start focusing on
> >> reducing the install script overhead, handling things like
> >> dependencies in a more clear way, and making yt work as an independent
> >> software package much better. And I think the more we move into this
> >> area the more we should try to have a rolling, regular release
> >> schedule. Does that ring true to everybody else, too? The more we
> >> have the ability to install yt independently of hg, independently of
> >> the install_script, the more we should try to make a regular release
> >> schedule with it.
> >
> >
> > Yes! I personally think regular releases should be nearly automated
> based
> > on the passing of tests at regular intervals (i.e. monthly/quarterly).
> If
> > we are diligent about setting up BB issues that track individual
> > enhancements, even the features changelog could be easily generated.
>
> I like this idea. We have speculated in the past about moving to
> quarterly releases. If we were better about managing the issue
> tracker (or JIRA!) and unit (not just answer) testing new
> functionality, this would be easier to manage. Furthermore, as you
> note, the changelog would be easier to write. Should we mandate that
> any substantial PR also include reference to an issue? Perhaps simply
> having an issue point to the PR and be closed when the PR is closed is
> good, to ensure we don't fragment the PR conversations but that we
> have a unified place where changes are tracked.
>
> I would support this. But we *need* to have a testing push to make it
> happen. I've been out of the loop most of this week, but I hope to be
> back in action next week. So what we're looking at is:
>
> 1) Issue tracking for enhancements, to allow for changelog writing and so
> on
> 2) Regular releases -- I'd push for quarterly -- with a real release
> coordinator
> 3) Much higher barrier to entry for testing
>
> Would contributors be willing to participate in this? I will commit
> to unit testing new functionality in advance of any push or PR.
>
> -Matt
>
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >>
> >> -Matt
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> >
> >> > Mike
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Casey,
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Casey W. Stark <
> caseywstark at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Just so this is clear, if we are working on development that is not
> >> >> > testing,
> >> >> > should we move over to 3.0 now?
> >> >>
> >> >> Not yet, but soon. Sorry, I should have been more clear -- I believe
> >> >> it's almost ready for primetime, and in a settled state for
> >> >> rectilinear, patch-based data. I will update the list very, very
> soon
> >> >> on its state. I'll go through the milestone list and take a crack at
> >> >> updating the tickets, the scripts, and report back.
> >> >>
> >> >> -Matt
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - Casey
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Sam Skillman <
> samskillman at gmail.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Sounds good to me. I was actually also holding out a bit to
> >> >> >> incorporate
> >> >> >> testing into some of the new rendering capabilities anyways.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Matthew Turk <
> matthewturk at gmail.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Hi Sam,
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Sam Skillman
> >> >> >>> <samskillman at gmail.com>
> >> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >> >>> > If the release timeframe is end of year, I will put in the
> alpha
> >> >> >>> > channel
> >> >> >>> > rendering, enabling a lot of cool things. It is already
> >> >> >>> > functional
> >> >> >>> > in
> >> >> >>> > one
> >> >> >>> > of my forks, but it needs to be cleaned up.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> What if we said instead that we'd release as soon as unit testing
> >> >> >>> is
> >> >> >>> ready and 3.0 is ready for daily use for patch-based AMR, and
> then
> >> >> >>> if
> >> >> >>> you have time before that point to get the alpha channel in good,
> >> >> >>> but
> >> >> >>> otherwise toss it into 3.0?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> -Matt
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > Sam
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Matthew Turk
> >> >> >>> > <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> >> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> Hi Jeff,
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:19 PM, j s oishi <jsoishi at gmail.com>
> >> >> >>> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >>> >> > Since testing is something that is so high priority for
> this,
> >> >> >>> >> > and
> >> >> >>> >> > otherwise 2.5 is just a stepping stone to 3.0 (which a *lot*
> >> >> >>> >> > of
> >> >> >>> >> > people
> >> >> >>> >> > are already diving into), maybe we should *only* include
> >> >> >>> >> > testing,
> >> >> >>> >> > unless there are some already done things we could toss in?
> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >>> >> > j
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> Come to mention it, I *really* like this idea. Perhaps we
> >> >> >>> >> should
> >> >> >>> >> identify a threshold for building out the non-core
> >> >> >>> >> infrastructure
> >> >> >>> >> fixes (i.e., having "pip install yt" work, having a good set
> of
> >> >> >>> >> testing, etc etc) and then any other fixes or improvements
> that
> >> >> >>> >> happen
> >> >> >>> >> along the way are just icing on the cake? I think having
> better
> >> >> >>> >> testing should definitely be the focus, particularly as we
> >> >> >>> >> transition
> >> >> >>> >> the codebase.
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> -Matt
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >>> >> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Matthew Turk
> >> >> >>> >> > <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> >> >> >>> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >> We should probably try to get a 2.5 release together by the
> >> >> >>> >> >> end
> >> >> >>> >> >> of
> >> >> >>> >> >> the
> >> >> >>> >> >> year. It would be really helpful if you are working on
> >> >> >>> >> >> something,
> >> >> >>> >> >> to
> >> >> >>> >> >> fill it out and target both milestone 2.5 and version 2.5
> as
> >> >> >>> >> >> an
> >> >> >>> >> >> issue.
> >> >> >>> >> >> That way we can identify goals and push to stable.
> Testing
> >> >> >>> >> >> should
> >> >> >>> >> >> perhaps be a huge focus of this release. But, once it's
> >> >> >>> >> >> done, I
> >> >> >>> >> >> think
> >> >> >>> >> >> we can try to transition to 3.0 for development.
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >> Here's the current list, which may need curation a bit as
> >> >> >>> >> >> some
> >> >> >>> >> >> seem
> >> >> >>> >> >> to
> >> >> >>> >> >> be completed or in progress:
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/issues?status=new&status=open&milestone=2.5
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >> If you want to subdivide something, create a new milestone
> >> >> >>> >> >> and
> >> >> >>> >> >> target
> >> >> >>> >> >> *that*, but with *version* 2.5.
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >> -Matt
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >>> >> >> PS The new bitbucket redesign is quite nice!
> >> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >>> >> >> yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> >>> >> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >> >>
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> >>> >> > yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> >>> >> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >> >
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >>> >> yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> >>> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> >>> > yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> >>> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >>> yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> >>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> >>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >> yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> > yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >> >
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> yt-dev mailing list
> >> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *********************************************************************
> >> > * *
> >> > * Dr. Michael Kuhlen Theoretical Astrophysics Center *
> >> > * email: mqk at astro.berkeley.edu UC Berkeley *
> >> > * cell phone: (831) 588-1468 B-116 Hearst Field Annex # 3411 *
> >> > * skype username: mikekuhlen Berkeley, CA 94720 *
> >> > * *
> >> > *********************************************************************
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > yt-dev mailing list
> >> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> yt-dev mailing list
> >> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > yt-dev mailing list
> > yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20121012/f52bb606/attachment.htm>
More information about the yt-dev
mailing list