[yt-dev] 3.0 release delay

Michael Zingale michael.zingale at stonybrook.edu
Tue Jul 29 11:12:21 PDT 2014


Cameron, if you assign me a section of the docs (preferably not
cosmology-specific), I'll go through it this afternoon/evening and test out
the code in it and correct any mistakes I see.

Mike


On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Jul 29, 2014 12:53 PM, "Cameron Hummels" <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > To respond to Britton's question, the things that I think are blockers
> on release are:
> >
> > --Update the documentation field list;  I started working on this three
> weeks ago and had something working roughly (dynamically generating the
> field list docs from the source code), but I encountered problems getting
> it to work for all of the frontend fields.  Matt took over, but I do not
> know its current state.
> >
> > --Add a description of how particle unions work, and demonstrate how to
> use them.  This should probably go in the "filtering data" page.  I tried
> this, but I do not know how to make a particle union nor can I figure it
> out from source.
> >
> > --Include more on the "fields" doc page on why particle fields are
> different than mesh fields, and in particular what happens when a particle
> field is added and the "deposit" fields that are generated from it.  And
> what these deposit fields mean (what is the diff between "cic" and
> "density", "count", etc.)
> >
> > --Update the "code support" page to accurately reflect what codes are
> supported, and what level of support is offered for each one.  Does anyone
> know the level of code support for each of the codes?
>
> Yup, all of these are mine and I'm planning to issue a PR today.
>
> >
> > --Here is the most time-consuming step, and one that i've been doing for
> a couple of weeks (which is how I've identified many of the previous tasks
> for updating the docs:
> > Proofread the docs looking for things that are inaccurate or that have
> not been touched since 2.x.  I'm not so concerned with typos or that sort
> of thing--mostly just that there is wrong information in the docs.  I found
> a bunch of old stuff that hasn't been changed as late as last night reading
> through the docs.  The parts that are out of date are not always easy to
> correct (it's not just changing pf->ds, or changing pf.h to ds), it's
> usually just inaccurate information that needs to be updated, and sometimes
> it is on specific topics on which only a handful of people are up-to-date
> for 3.0.  This can mean actually trying to run code snippets that are in
> the docs (just as a new user would if they were to encounter that section)
> and see if it actually does what it is supposed to do, or if it breaks then
> fix it.  Not always trivial.
> >
>
> Aaron Smith stopped by IRC volunteering to help with this, too. (Thank
> you, Aaron!!!)
>
> > So you can see why I'm hesitant to have things go out tomorrow.  I don't
> see these as trivial tasks, or making things "perfect", but things that new
> users of 3.0 *will* ask about.  Heck, I'm now a seasoned user of 3.0 and I
> don't know the answers to these (and want to know), as an example.
> >
> > Cameron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> ...and I think they're mostly or exclusively on me. I have carved out
> time today to finish my sections up.
> >>
> >> On Jul 29, 2014 11:22 AM, "Nathan Goldbaum" <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> For what it's worth, the issues marked in red on the trello board were
> considered blockers a couple weeks ago.  I don't think any of the remaining
> blockers require code changes.
> >>>
> >>> On Tuesday, July 29, 2014, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't think I can be asked to predict what bugs will shake out, but
> I will concede waiting for waiting's sake since we're trying to stick to a
> timeline.  However, I think we need to sort through the remaining trello
> items, blocking issues, and PRs that are supposed to make it in by 3.0 all
> be on the same page with what absolutely must get done before this release.
>  At the same time, let's not be perfectionists, here.  There will be
> further releases and things will continue to be fixed up over time.
>  Cameron, can you point to specific items that you think are blockers that
> won't get done on time?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm -1 on further delays. Looking at the blockers and the ones
> assigned to me, I will have them done by Wednesday. Which ones are the ones
> that will be problematic or that need to shake out? We've been in a light
> code freeze for over a week at this point, right?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Jul 29, 2014 3:22 AM, "Britton Smith" <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We shouldn't release until blocking issues have been cleared, and
> probably a day or two after that to let things settle and bugs shake out.
>  One final hangout/sprint to establish what exactly needs to get done
> before the release is probably a good idea.  Would anyone be up for doing
> that sometime this week?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Britton
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 6:50 AM, John ZuHone <jzuhone at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I won't be able to help out with documentation for a few days
> (probably until next week), as I am away at a meeting and have some other
> things to attend to in addition.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If we push it to next week, I will be able to assist.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Jul 28, 2014, at 10:45 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> First I want to thank everyone for their hard work at getting 3.0
> where it is in terms of functionality, bug fixes, and documentation.
>  However, I'm concerned that there are still several things that need doing
> in the documentation prior to release of 3.0.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://trello.com/b/Y5XV4Hod/yt-3-0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Beyond that, I think once those things are done, we need some
> proofreading of the docs, because I'm not convinced there aren't still
> sections that are out of date and reflecting 2.x versions of the code.
>  Proofreading (and subsequent correction) may take a while.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think it behooves us to push back the release a few more days
> until we make sure this is where we want it to be.  This is a major release
> with major API breakages, and I want to make sure the documentation
> actually reflects the codebase, so new users and new converts to 3.0 don't
> get confused.  I certainly was confused when i first moved over because
> there are a lot of significant changes that it's easy to forget after using
> it for a while and being as tied into the community as we all are.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What do people think?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cameron
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> 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
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
>


-- 
Michael Zingale
Associate Professor

Dept. of Physics & Astronomy • Stony Brook University • Stony Brook, NY
11794-3800
*phone*:  631-632-8225
*e-mail*: Michael.Zingale at stonybrook.edu
*web*: http://www.astro.sunysb.edu/mzingale
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20140729/e7d29a89/attachment.htm>


More information about the yt-dev mailing list