My understanding is that the halo finding interfaces have all been updated by Hilary in 3.0 and that they did not work at all prior to that.

On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <> wrote:
Do the old VR and halo interfaces work?  Not much effort has gone into porting them, I think.

On Tuesday, June 24, 2014, Sam Skillman <> wrote:
I'm +1 on this, particularly since I'm at fault for not pushing on the VR as much as I'd like to.

On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Matthew Turk <> wrote:
Hi all,

One thing we really tried to do with 3.0 was break all the APIs we
thought we'd need to before release.  This included things like ds/pf,
index/hierarchy, the way data selections were made, etc.

It's starting to become clear that we are approaching maturity at
different rates in these initiatives.  I am wondering if perhaps we
should de-couple the release from all of the API breakages, and
instead note which interfaces we know are going to change in the

Pragmatically, what this would mean is:

 * Release a 3.0 with the old VR and halo finding interfaces
 * Release a 3.1 with either the new VR or the new halo finding (or both)
 * Do the same for 3.2

This doesn't fit with the usual "major numbers are where APIs break"
philosophy that comes from semantic versioning, but I think from the
perspective of pragmatism, if we identify those sections of the code
that are *going* to change, and we pitch 3.0 as the first part of a
staged release of totally rewritten infrastructure, we can likely come
out okay.

I'd like to put this out there for discussion.

yt-dev mailing list

yt-dev mailing list