Mailman 3 Re: [Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch - yt-dev

newer
Ticket Triage

Re: [Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch

older
Migration to 2.0 being the stable...

Stephen Skory

9 Nov 2010 9 Nov '10

2:15 a.m.

...

Thoughts?

Nothing specific, except that I support this idea. I've been bugging Sam to integrate his volume rendering stuff into the development branch (and write docs for it simultaneously), so that stuff may be ready for release by then (Sam?). I would also like to point out that we will have to go through the docs and change the examples, in addition to the conversion rubric Matt wrote about. Stephen Skory stephenskory@yahoo.com http://stephenskory.com/ 510.621.3687 (google voice)

Show replies by date

Matthew Turk

9 Nov 9 Nov

2:17 a.m.

New subject: [Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch

Awesome! Hopefully the update will be an easy process -- I think the only imports that broke are things that aren't from "yt.mods", which the majority of functionality is in. I believe that our biggest problem will actually be people who write things like: from yt.mods import * import yt.lagos as L import yt.raven as R a = L.EnzoStaticOutput("something") pc = R.PlotCollection(...) But, again, hopefully the sweetening of better readability and the kD-tree (along with the other improvements that have been made along the way) will help with this. On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Stephen Skory wrote:

...

...
Thoughts?

Nothing specific, except that I support this idea. I've been bugging Sam to integrate his volume rendering stuff into the development branch (and write docs for it simultaneously), so that stuff may be ready for release by then (Sam?). I would also like to point out that we will have to go through the docs and change the examples, in addition to the conversion rubric Matt wrote about.

Stephen Skory stephenskory@yahoo.com http://stephenskory.com/ 510.621.3687 (google voice)

_______________________________________________ Yt-dev mailing list Yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org

Samuel W Skillman

2:26 a.m.

New subject: [Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch

Hi all, Definitely. I'm working on it right now actually. I've nearly finished cleaning out the bugs from the merge with the yt (2.0) branch, and once that's done I'll get going on the docs. Since my original kd-rendering branch was a branch off of what became "stable", there is a big merge changeset in there. What I plan on doing is finishing the merge/docs today or tomorrow, and pushing the kd-rendering branch. I don't quite feel comfortable merging that and the yt branch together, so I'll probably look for some help from Matt to make sure that it's all getting done the right way. The other option I see to "closing" the kd-rendering branch is to just add the functionality to the yt branch without going through the merging process. Since the kd-tree stuff is mostly additions, the only merging has to do with camera.py and a function or two in the parallel_analysis_interface, this wouldn't be that difficult. So, the question is: would you all (mostly Matt) rather just get rid of the kd-rendering branch and have me add what is needed to the "yt" branch or would you rather have me commit the rather huge merges, possibly making the stable->yt merge more complicated. I'm happy doing either. Anyways, I'm looking forward to this migration, and I think after a couple of updates to various user scripts it should be a great improvement! Sam On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Stephen Skory wrote:

...

...
Thoughts?

Nothing specific, except that I support this idea. I've been bugging Sam to integrate his volume rendering stuff into the development branch (and write docs for it simultaneously), so that stuff may be ready for release by then (Sam?). I would also like to point out that we will have to go through the docs and change the examples, in addition to the conversion rubric Matt wrote about.

Stephen Skory stephenskory@yahoo.com http://stephenskory.com/ 510.621.3687 (google voice)

_______________________________________________ Yt-dev mailing list Yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org

-- Samuel W. Skillman DOE Computational Science Graduate Fellow Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy University of Colorado at Boulder samuel.skillman[at]colorado.edu

Matthew Turk

3:57 a.m.

New subject: [Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch

Hi Sam,

...

Definitely. I'm working on it right now actually. I've nearly finished cleaning out the bugs from the merge with the yt (2.0) branch, and once that's done I'll get going on the docs. Since my original kd-rendering branch was a branch off of what became "stable", there is a big merge changeset in there. What I plan on doing is finishing the merge/docs today or tomorrow, and pushing the kd-rendering branch. I don't quite feel comfortable merging that and the yt branch together, so I'll probably look for some help from Matt to make sure that it's all getting done the right way.

Cool! I'm happy to help out. I think the docs need a restructuring. Britton and I took a swing at this a while back, but I think I'm going to wait until changes to the yt-doc repo are finished and then have another go. Here's a list of my notes on this, for what it's worth: http://yt.enzotools.org/wiki/DocumentationNotes I'm really unsatisfied with them, and trying to come up with a new mechanism for approaching new users and then the transition from beginning user to advanced user has stumped me.

...

The other option I see to "closing" the kd-rendering branch is to just add the functionality to the yt branch without going through the merging process. Since the kd-tree stuff is mostly additions, the only merging has to do with camera.py and a function or two in the parallel_analysis_interface, this wouldn't be that difficult. So, the question is: would you all (mostly Matt) rather just get rid of the kd-rendering branch and have me add what is needed to the "yt" branch or would you rather have me commit the rather huge merges, possibly making the stable->yt merge more complicated. I'm happy doing either. Anyways, I'm looking forward to this migration, and I think after a couple of updates to various user scripts it should be a great improvement! Sam

I'll handle ditching the kd-render branch; if you want to go ahead and just transplant your changes into the yt branch that'd be best. Awesome work, Sam. -Matt

...

On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Stephen Skory wrote:

...
...
Thoughts?

Nothing specific, except that I support this idea. I've been bugging Sam to integrate his volume rendering stuff into the development branch (and write docs for it simultaneously), so that stuff may be ready for release by then (Sam?). I would also like to point out that we will have to go through the docs and change the examples, in addition to the conversion rubric Matt wrote about.

Stephen Skory stephenskory@yahoo.com http://stephenskory.com/ 510.621.3687 (google voice)

_______________________________________________ Yt-dev mailing list Yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org

-- Samuel W. Skillman DOE Computational Science Graduate Fellow Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy University of Colorado at Boulder samuel.skillman[at]colorado.edu

_______________________________________________ Yt-dev mailing list Yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org

4911

Age (days ago)

4911

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

3 comments

3 participants

participants (3)

Matthew Turk
Samuel W Skillman
Stephen Skory

Re: [Yt-dev] Migration to 2.0 being the stable branch

Stephen Skory

Matthew Turk

Samuel W Skillman

Matthew Turk

tags

participants (3)