-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
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
Release v2.0 #94
Comments
Sounds good to me. |
I've set the pyregion 2.0 milestone / release data to October 6. The main change to use Astropy instead of Kapteyn was done by @sargas in #100. Everyone - Please see https://github.com/astropy/pyregion/milestone/4 and help resolve those issues / review the PRs, or file new ones now if you think something should be changed for version 2.0. IMO we should take this as our one chance to do all breaking changes (even if minor, like changing a function parameter name for consistency) and then (hopefully) keep the package stable again for the coming years. We already have a few breaking changes: |
Just a ping - it would be great to release 2.0 as pyregion 1.2 is broken with Numpy 1.11 due to some of the kapteyn code (which has been removed in master):
|
@astrofrog - Agreed. I'll do the the pyregions 2.0 release for next week Thursday (May 18): |
@cdeil - just to check, do you still plan on doing the 2.0 release? |
There's still some open issues under the 2.0 milestone ( https://github.com/astropy/pyregion/milestone/4 ) but maybe I should just merge #113 and go ahead and make a release now? I'll ping on #65 once more asking if anyone has the expertise and time to have a closer look and resolve it soon. |
I've made the 2.0 release: https://pypi.org/project/pyregion/ Can someone please try it out? @bsipocz - do you have time to do this update? |
Tag is also there: https://github.com/astropy/pyregion/releases/tag/2.0 |
Docs build is also OK: http://pyregion.readthedocs.io/en/2.0/ |
@cdeil - Thanks for making the release! |
Draft for pyregion 2.0 release announcement email: @astrofrog or anyone - Thoughts? |
Looks good! |
I tried the conda package on Mac. There's this warning:
But all tests pass, so I'm assuming all is OK. If someone thinks this needs to be looked into, please open a new issue. Release announced on astropy and astropy-dev mailling lists: |
Just a note that there appears to be an incompatible change that causes aplpy (1.1.1) to fail when using the 2.0 version of pyregion. I've submitted an issue with aplpy (aplpy/aplpy#369) but I haven't fully debugged the issue to work out why it occurs. |
I'm experiencing the same issue as @epaell. I gave some more details in aplpy/aplpy#369. |
I'm closing this old issue; it was about discussing the v2.0 release, which went out last year and then I forgot to close here. @epaell @boada - for v2.0 there was some rewrite to use Astropy internally, and it looks like that has broken something for WCS with more than two axes. I see #66 is still open and seems very much related, please either comment there, or file a new issue. |
FYI: I've added a
v2.0
milestone and removed thev1.3
milestone.My suggestion would be that we release
v1.2
now, and reserve backward-incompatible changes to av2.0
release, to be done in ~ 1 month.There's many issues currently under the
v2.0
milestone, but some of the key proposed changes that would justify a major version bump would be changes that are silently and sometimes slightly backward-incompatible like #89 or #35.Another goal of 2.0 I think should be to get rid of the bundled Kapteyn like @sargas already attempted in #54 , so that
pyregion
can easily be packaged by Debian and others (they have to remove bundled files, it's not allowed).@leejjoon , all - Sounds like a plan? Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: