Hi, It seems to me the arguments _for_ skimage2 are pretty good - it avoids any API breakage for current code, Hinsen or otherwise, with the tradeoff of having to use a somewhat ugly package import name. Greg referred to the arguments against in the SKIP - which are: """ Ultimately, the core developers felt that this approach could unnecessarily fragment the community, between those that continue using 0.19 and those that shift to 1.0. Ultimately, the transition of downstream code to 1.0 would be equally painful as the proposed approach, but the pressure to make the switch would be decreased, as everyone installing ``scikit-image`` would still get the old version. """ That second paragraph worries me, because it seems to imply that you are contemplating an option that will cause a lot of code breakage, Hinsen and otherwise, specifically in order to force people to upgrade to the new API. Surely that will cause a serious breach of trust with your users? I bet they expect you to take their concerns very seriously when doing big shifts like this, whereas this looks as if you are putting heavy weight on the interests of the developers against the interests of the users. I mean, can't the users expect you to accept some reduction in speed of uptake, in order to defend them from this level of breakage? Cheers, Matthew On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 3:48 PM Stefan van der Walt <stefanv@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Hi Juan,
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, at 01:37, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote:
- 0.19 is released, no deprecations, no nothing, everything is as it always was. - over six months, we break everything we want to break on master on the road to the brave new 1.0 world. - once we have everything where we want it, we release 0.20, identical to 0.19 but with a warning to migrate. We simultaneously release 1.0b0, so that people can migrate and depend explicitly on scikit-image>=1.0b0. - after six months, we release 0.21. This is a completely broken release that does not import: it raises an exception that you *must* either migrate or pin to continue using scikit-image. - after an unspecified period of time, we finally release 1.0.
Unfortunately, this does not address one of our common user groups:
Scientist writes script. Scientist goes off to do something else. Scientist comes back an unspecified time later and runs script. Results are different without the code breaking.
I am not a fan of all these versioning shenanigans; it will lead to a lot of confusion and churn.
Renaming the import is painful, but it's painful once and then it's over. It is simple and can be explained to any user. And we can do it right now, instead of juggling three or four different versions with strange characteristics.
Stéfan
_______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list -- scikit-image@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to scikit-image-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/scikit-image.python.org/ Member address: matthew.brett@gmail.com