[yt-dev] Release 2.5?

Britton Smith brittonsmith at gmail.com
Thu Oct 11 04:42:13 PDT 2012 

Hi Matt,

Are there resources describing how to set up new tests?

Britton

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Britton,
>
> No worries about asking again -- there are currently two types of
> tests.  One is nascent, and only a handful exist (although many
> libraries have many thousands) and that's unit testing.  That's
> primarily what Sam and everyone else are talking about, although
> "testing" also includes Answer Testing, which is currently running
> every 30 minutes or so on my machine.  We want to supplement answer
> testing with much smaller, more contained unit testing.  Answer
> testing is the same thing you and I worked on about a year ago, and
> it's also what we use for Enzo.  (That was the subject of the ticket,
> although now it needs to be extended.)
>
> But, we now want to add on very tiny, unit tests that do not require
> either a reference answer that's externally available or a lot of time
> to run the tests.  So for instance, this would be the new
> interpolation tests and so on.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I apologize if I'm asking questions on things that have already been
> > discussed.  What documentation currently exists on the testing
> > infrastructure, specifically how to write and contribute the tests?  I
> have
> > been long assigned to the issue of "testing documentation" on the issue
> > tracker, but I took myself off it this morning because I haven't worked
> with
> > it in so long that I don't remember how it works.  I would be willing to
> > help out getting the tests together, but it would be helpful if there was
> > something I could go look at for how to do them and what remains.  I've
> been
> > out of the loop for a while, so sorry if this has been dealt with.
> >
> > Also, I like the idea of having an issue that can be pointed to for each
> > enhancement.  I would support that as well as quarterly releases.
> >
> > Britton
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:48 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
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20121011/003bcc1a/attachment.html>

More information about the yt-dev mailing list