[yt-dev] 2.6 release?

Nathan Goldbaum nathan12343 at gmail.com
Thu Nov 21 16:33:06 PST 2013


I'm planning on finishing up the remaining docs issues that are assigned to
me tonight:

https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/issue/710/yt-hub-docs-need-some-updating
https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/issue/554/document-cosmology-units
https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/issue/711/expand-upon-unit-handling

Don't think I'll be able to make a hangout AM Eastern time, but of the four
docs issues that are currently anassigned, I think only the following issue
is worth worrying about:

https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/issue/632/need-to-document-derived_field

Hope that's helpful for you guys :)

-Nathan

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Britton,
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I am +2 on Kacper sending the announcement.
> >
> > We also still have 51 open issues tagged for version 2.6.  Of those,
> only 11
> > are listed as blockers and are all documentation related.  I am assigned
> two
> > of those and both can be done by tomorrow.
> >
> > Of the 40 non-blocker issues, 20 are not even assigned.  Maybe we should
> go
> > through those and figure out where they stand for the release.  I think
> some
> > may need to be dealt with.  Should we try to have a quick hangout to
> figure
> > that out?
>
> I agree.  I'd prefer that we focus on the blockers for a 2.6 release,
> and then we can either assign, move, or close the remaining ones for a
> later time.  Would that work?
>
> I could also do a hangout tomorrow morning (east coast us time) to
> work through a few.
>
> -Matt
>
> >
> > Britton
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Do we think a release tomorrow is still feasible?  I think there are
> >> remaining pull requests for the code base (and I owe some tests for
> >> the profile plotter) and there are three outstanding doc PRs, too.
> >>
> >> Additionally, when the release goes out, what does everybody think of
> >> asking Kacper to send the announcement?
> >>
> >> -Matt
> >>
> >> -Matt
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 3:24 PM, John ZuHone <jzuhone at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Sorry--let me be more clear--next week's Friday.
> >> >
> >> > On Nov 11, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps a compromise on the release date is to release 2.6 by mid-week
> >> > next
> >> > week?  Or even Friday of next week?  That way job apps can still
> >> > reference
> >> > the material which will be the main release, and will be put out
> before
> >> > Thanksgiving (most job apps are viewed after Thanksgiving, even ones
> due
> >> > prior to it), and it gives us a chance to get some due diligence on
> all
> >> > of
> >> > the blockers for 2.6.  I agree that we should shoot for having
> >> > functional
> >> > code (and docs) above having something out there in the wild quickly.
> >> >
> >> > I agree with the sentiment that we can and should continue to tweek
> the
> >> > docs
> >> > (and bugs in the code) on the 2.x branch even after 2.6 release.
> >> >
> >> > The main things I see as blockers on 2.6 are the doc issues I've
> listed
> >> > as
> >> > "blockers".  I'm going to go back through them right now, and make
> sure
> >> > they're all assigned to someone, and that the responsible person knows
> >> > that
> >> > these isses are blockers and should be done in the next 1-2 weeks.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Britton Smith <
> brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Waiting on the PR is totally fine with me.  Let's get that stuff
> right
> >> >> before we release it.  I will definitely keep working the docs for it
> >> >> and
> >> >> have those ready for when the Profile/PhasePlot PR is ready.
> >> >>
> >> >> That stuff aside, maybe here is where everyone should report in with
> >> >> what
> >> >> they'd like/need to get done before the 2.6 release and when they
> would
> >> >> like
> >> >> that release to take place.  For me, other than any additional
> tweaks I
> >> >> might have to make to the Profile/Phase PR, my remaining assignments
> >> >> are all
> >> >> in the docs and I should be able to get them all done this week.
> >> >>
> >> >> Finally, I would like to add a proposal that we allow for some
> >> >> additional
> >> >> doc tweaking after the official 2.6 release.  We should definitely
> >> >> finish
> >> >> all of the blocker issues that have been laid out before releasing,
> but
> >> >> there will surely be small things that can be improved on that we
> might
> >> >> happen across at some later date.  As this release or one soon after
> >> >> will be
> >> >> the final 2.x release, I would like to leave it as close to a
> finished
> >> >> product as possible.
> >> >>
> >> >> Britton
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Nathan Goldbaum
> >> >> <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> My main concern is that I’m not happy with the current state of
> >> >>> ProfilePlot and PhasePlot going out as they exist in the open PR.
> >> >>> That’s
> >> >>> not a dig on Britton - he did a great job - I just think we can do
> >> >>> better
> >> >>> and provide something that’s fully functional and tested.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That said, I don’t think that can happen by Friday.  As I’ve said
> >> >>> elsewhere I’m happy to look at ProfilePlot and PhasePlot this
> weekend.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Britton, please don’t let this stop you from updating the docs for
> >> >>> ProfilePlot and PhasePlot.  If anything breaks in your docs (I
> expect
> >> >>> it
> >> >>> won’t) I will update the docs myself.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -Nathan
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On November 11, 2013 at 10:53:37 AM, Matthew Turk
> >> >>> (matthewturk at gmail.com)
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi Nathan,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Well, so, I have to take the fall for this one. Last week, there was
> >> >>> some discussion about what needed to happen for a release, and I
> >> >>> misunderstood everything, evidently! I thought that the main issue
> >> >>> was the profile/phase plot code and the remaining doc tickets. So
> >> >>> this weekend, Britton issued the updated PR (which addressed the
> >> >>> comments you brought up in your original comments on the PR) and was
> >> >>> doing some docs updates.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This morning, I took a look at what was going on, and wrote to
> Cameron
> >> >>> asking him to decide which bugs for the docs were blockers and which
> >> >>> were not, and if we could try to aim for having everything in a
> >> >>> workable state by Friday, so the release could go out. (Only a few
> >> >>> weeks overdue -- and most of those weeks were due to *me* dragging
> my
> >> >>> heels!)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> My main concern here is: people are putting out job apps, and some
> of
> >> >>> those job apps reference code that's in the yt 2.6 code base. I
> think
> >> >>> a good way to "do right by contributors" is to make sure that,
> >> >>> especially in a vulnerable time in a career, the project tries to
> >> >>> support them in whatever way it can. I've done a poor job of
> >> >>> implementing that, as releases have languished and gone on, and I
> was
> >> >>> just trying to right the ship, as it were. Ultimately, though, I do
> >> >>> think we should not release something we're not really happy with,
> >> >>> although I'd like to try to avoid having perfect be the enemy of
> good
> >> >>> enough. Maybe a good compromise would be to figure out what is still
> >> >>> necessary, come up with a reasonable timescale, and discuss it
> openly.
> >> >>> I screwed that up, and I'm sorry.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Anyway, I know there's been a lot of talk about 2.6 being the last
> >> >>> major 2.X release. Maybe that's put some pressure on this release
> >> >>> that's not warranted, and I will take the blame for that, too. I
> >> >>> anticipate we'll be fixing little things, tweaking docs, and on and
> >> >>> on, for some time to come. Just because I would like to encourage
> >> >>> people to try out 3.0 doesn't mean everybody has to stop using what
> >> >>> works. I expect much of our existing userbase won't change for a
> >> >>> while.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -Matt
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Nathan Goldbaum
> >> >>> <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> > Hi all,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Cameron just pinged me about a docs issue with a Sizemore about
> the
> >> >>> > 2.6
> >> >>> > release happening on Friday. Can we hold off on that for another
> >> >>> > week
> >> >>> > or
> >> >>> > two? I'd like to be able to work on ProfilePlot and PhasePlot this
> >> >>> > weekend.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Natha
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> > 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
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Cameron Hummels
> >> > Postdoctoral Researcher
> >> > Steward Observatory
> >> > University of Arizona
> >> > http://chummels.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/20131121/3849a815/attachment.htm>


More information about the yt-dev mailing list