[yt-dev] Releasing 3.0a1

[j s oishi]

+1 on yt-3.0 in yt_analysis/yt
+1 on keeping yt-3.0 fork around a bit longer

anyone doing hg update -C without knowing what they're doing will
probably end up getting what's coming to them even if yt-3.0 wasn't a
part of the equation.

j

On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on yt-3.0 in yt_analysis/yt.  I think this should definitely be done at
> some point, and now that it's getting to the point where people can use it,
> this may help lower that entry barrier just enough.  I would say keep the
> yt-3.0 repo around for now so that people who are developing in forks of it
> can finish what they're doing, issue a PR, and then move over to a fork of
> the main yt repo.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Tomorrow is the fifteenth, which puts us on track for 3.0a1:
>>
>> https://ytep.readthedocs.org/en/latest/YTEPs/YTEP-0008.html
>>
>> Releasing an alpha of 3.0 means:
>>
>>  * Tagging in the repo
>>  * Sending out an email to yt-users with plenty of caveats
>>  * Providing installation instructions
>>  * Soliciting feedback
>>
>> I'd like to suggest that this also includes a code dump into
>> yt_analysis/yt at the tag point.  This means putting the branch yt-3.0
>> into the main yt repository.  This provides a few things:
>>
>> 1) Anyone who manually pulls can switch much more easily (this will
>> not affect "yt update" I believe)
>> 2) We can consolidate a little bit of the differences between the two
>> repositories
>> 3) Installing 3.0 from the install script just means changing the
>> branch name in install_script.sh.
>>
>> On the downside, a blind "hg update -C" could potentially switch
>> branches.  I don't think this is a big deal since this is not a common
>> thing to do.
>>
>> [+-][01] on pushing yt-3.0 branch into yt_analysis/yt?
>>
>> I am neutral to killing off yt_analysis/yt-3.0 at this time and
>> developing yt-3.0 in yt_analysis/yt, but would entertain those
>> suggestions.  (This would mean higher traffic on pull requests.)
>>
>> There are still a few outstanding things before the alpha.  Doug,
>> would you like me to pull in the artio changes?  And Chris, do you
>> think you'll have time to address the outstanding pull request
>> comments?  I also intend to fix RAMSES particles tomorrow, but if that
>> doesn't happen it's no big deal.
>>
>> -Matt
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>