-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Added conda build recipe and build script #225
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
"conda build ." worked on the workstations, and conda install worked on the thin client.
Ideally, the conda build could happen through the github CI, and if successful, then it would publish to the noaa-gfdl anaconda channel: https://anaconda.org/noaa-gfdl For new releases (new git tags), we would want the published conda package to have the same version/tag. For pushes to the main branch, we could have the published conda package have a |
I think it is better to keep the conda recipe in a different repository. We
do not want to create a new conda binary package frequently, and only after
we mint a release.
…On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:00 Chris Blanton ***@***.***> wrote:
Ideally, the conda build could happen through the github CI, and if
successful, then it would publish to the noaa-gfdl anaconda channel:
https://anaconda.org/noaa-gfdl
For new releases (new git tags), we would want the published conda package
to have the same version/tag.
For pushes to the main branch, we could have the published conda package
have a test or develop version.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#225 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADJUSYNXHPWHNXIZU64I6LYEJN47AVCNFSM6AAAAAAX6E3VF2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMBYG4YTQNJRHA>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
@underwoo thanks for the suggestion, but how is the frequency of conda binary releases related? Regardless of where the conda recipe is stored, we'll only release a conda binary once per release. I sort of see the advantage of keeping the recipes separate, in that build-only changes won't clutter up the source repository. Hopefully, soon we'll have several conda and spack recipes, e.g. spack and conda recipes for fre-nctools, hsm, and the new fre-cli. Should they all be together (e.g. NOAA-GFDL/conda-recipes), or one recipe collection per package (e.g. NOAA-GFDL/fre-nctools-recipes)? |
For now, I think a single repository for all the recipes. For an example look at how conda-forge does it. While they do have separate repositories for the recipes, they combine them in a feedstock repository. We can separate them later if the one repository becomes too unwieldy. |
Thanks, @underwoo. That sounds like a plan- one NOAA-GFDL repository for all conda recipes, like conda-forge. Can you create the repository, or is there a form for that? I think we would want it in the least surprising public place (https://github.com/NOAA-GFDL/conda-recipes). The individual recipes would be a subdirectory that could be a submodule as needed (e.g. recipes/fre-nctools). Although, I wonder if we should raise the ante and make our recipes officially part of conda-forge. We can always do that later, I suppose. (conda-forge requires that all prerequisites be also in conda-forge, I think, so may be difficult for some packages). |
"conda build ." worked on the workstations, and conda install worked on the thin client.
#224