[yt-dev] yt 3.1?

Matthew Turk matthewturk at gmail.com
Tue Oct 28 18:20:04 PDT 2014


Well, then we shouldn't call it 3.1, I think.

On Tue Oct 28 2014 at 8:19:38 PM Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm good with this.  I'm personally anxious about pushing the VR out right
> now, because there may be some API mods as the VR goes towards including
> movie stuff.  My concern is that if we push the new VR module into the
> public, people will use it and modifying the API will be very hard at that
> point because it will then break people's code.  The movie VR stuff is
> something I was going to begin working on once the static frame VR stuff
> was more set, which is what we're working on now.  I figured timeframe for
> both to be done was end of January, but Sam may have different ideas.
>
> Cameron
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good to me, too.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds good to me.  I think we were due anyway.
>>>
>>> Sam, what do you think the chances of getting the VR PR landed are?
>>>
>>> On Tue Oct 28 2014 at 4:26:22 PM Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> There have been a number of cool new features in the pull request queue
>>>> recently. Some of these have added new features and I think it might be
>>>> worthwhile to indicate that by bumping the minor version number on the next
>>>> release.
>>>>
>>>> I think it would be a good idea to try to integrate the open PRs as
>>>> well as any that come in over the next couple of weeks that can be reviewed,
>>>> call it yt 3.1 and release on or around Dec. 1. This will mean generating a
>>>> proofread docs build and perhaps a few days of low-hanging issue triaging.
>>>>
>>>> I'd nominate John ZuHone to send out the release email to recognize the
>>>> hard work he's been putting in recently.
>>>>
>>>> Just an idea, but I've tried to include specifics as a basis for
>>>> further discussion.  What do you all think?
>>>>
>>>> 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/20141029/28343fc1/attachment.htm>


More information about the yt-dev mailing list