[yt-dev] Proposal: merge 'experimental' bookmark into the 'development' bookmark

Nathan Goldbaum nathan12343 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 4 12:31:26 PDT 2014


Hi all,

This came up during the google hangout this morning and I think it's a good
idea.

Right now there are four heads and three named branches in the
yt_analysis/yt mercurial repository:

- "stable"
  This corresponds to the 2.6.2 stable release.

- "yt"
  This corresponds to the 2.7dev branch

- "development"
  This is on the yt-3.0 named branch, but before the unitrefactor and field
refactor were merged in.

- "experimental"
  This is also on the yt-3.0 named branch, and incldues unitrefactor, field
refactor, and many other changes added since the development workshop at
UCSC.

I see a good reason to retain the "yt" development branch - there have
several pull requests into it and many of our users are still using it for
day-to-day work.

I don't see a good reason to keep the distinction between "development" and
"experimental".  There have been no pull requests into the "development"
bookmark.  There are also known bugs with respect to particle field
detection on the "development" bookmark.

We wanted to keep the "development" bookmark as a way to easily update to a
yt-3.0 release from before the time when unitrefactor and the field
refactor were merged in.

I think that keeping a seperate head in the repository for this purpose is
unnecessary - we could just have a named tag.  For example, we could call
it yt-3.0a5 and point it at the current development bookmark changeset
(0d705d2ae8eb).

Benefits to doing this:

We would only have three heads in the main repo, each on a different named
branch.  This will make it easier to work with bitbucket, which has a UI
optimized for named branches rather than bookmarks.

We will onboard more users to the new codebase, which is the way forward
and represents the code that will actually be released for the final 3.0
release.

Possible issues:

The "bleeding edge" install script will build a version of yt including all
the new features.  Since documentation is still not up to snuff, there
might be confusion due to innacurate or incomplete documentation.

I'd love to hear feedback about this - particularly if there are any strong
objections.

-Nathan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20140404/d625496e/attachment.htm>


More information about the yt-dev mailing list