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

[Sam Skillman]

+1
On Apr 4, 2014 7:15 PM, "Cameron Hummels" <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 6:33 PM, B.W. Keller <kellerbw at mcmaster.ca> wrote:
>
>> I also agree.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:42 PM, John ZuHone <jzuhone at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Apr 4, 2014, at 3:31 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > 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
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20140404/d9a41251/attachment.html>