[yt-dev] Release 2.5?

Matthew Turk matthewturk at gmail.com
Fri Oct 12 14:39:37 PDT 2012 

Okay, me too.  I've submitted a request for an Open Source License.

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed.  I think this JIRA tool looks like just a further addition to the
> nice bitbucket interface, and it will potentially keep communication clean
> and archived.  +1
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Christopher Moody <cemoody at ucsc.edu> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

More information about the yt-dev mailing list