[yt-dev] Big pf => ds PR

[Nathan Goldbaum]

I would be very surprised if there are breakages for the vast majority of
yt workflows.  The tests, including the docs build are quite extensive and
touch most of the codebase.

I am also happy to fix any breakages as they come up.

That said, it would be nice to get some testing of analysis modules,
particularly any that have been updated but still do not have automatically
run code in the documentation or tests.


On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:

> My guess is that the only thing to do with this is just put it in and then
> try to deal with the breakages that occur as they are discovered.  We can
> review it as much as we want, but there are still going to be breakages.
>  As we know, the test suite doesn't touch every part of the code, and it's
> far too much code to go over by hand, right?
>
> I believe it has to be done before 3.0 goes out, but I just want today to
> be spent on documentation, if we truly want to get 3.0 out in two weeks.
>  I'm not veto'ing, but I feel like there are only a couple of peole working
> on docs, and that is not going to get the code ready for release in two
> weeks as much as everyone wants it to be released then.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > We can do it, but I'm a little hesitant.  My guess is that it is going
>> to
>> > break something, because it touches basically every part of the code,
>> and
>> > then we might end up spending the entire doc spring trying to patch up
>> the
>> > problems caused by it instead of writing docs.  Still, I guess it has to
>> > happen sometime.
>>
>> Would you be able to take the time to review it or pull it down, then?
>>  It was opened over a month ago and was subject to a lot of mailing
>> list discussion, and if it gets a strong veto, it needs to wait until
>> 3.1.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:22 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> Nathan's big pf=>ds pull request has been outstanding for some time
>> >> now, and it's ready to go.
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/pull-request/954/replacing-pf-with-ds
>> >>
>> >> Unless someone objects, I would like to bring this in before the doc
>> >> sprint today.
>> >>
>> >> -Matt
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/20140718/17b9db5d/attachment.html>