[yt-dev] 2.6 release?

Mon Nov 11 12:01:39 PST 2013

Unfortunately, I have a big race this weekend, so I cannot help past
Thursday, but I'm going to get my docs stuff done by then, so hopefully
that will help with things.

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>wrote:

> Nathan, I might be interested in that, in the case that I can help with
> your efforts on the Profile/PhasePlot stuff.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> I’m planning on working on yt stuff this weekend.  If anyone is
>> interested in sprinting over a G+ hangout, I’d be up for that.
>>
>> On November 11, 2013 at 11:51:13 AM, Cameron Hummels (chummels at gmail.com<//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 <//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
>
>

-- 
Cameron Hummels
Postdoctoral Researcher
Steward Observatory
University of Arizona
http://chummels.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20131111/ea5fc4ce/attachment.html>