Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 9, 2021. It is now read-only.

added intersect() to Workplane #189

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 10, 2017
Merged

Conversation

fragmuffin
Copy link
Contributor

addressing issue #188

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.0008%) to 86.557% when pulling 15a9c0b on fragmuffin:feature/intersect into f4e63b3 on dcowden:master.

@dcowden dcowden merged commit 484a1ca into dcowden:master Sep 10, 2017
@dcowden
Copy link
Owner

dcowden commented Sep 10, 2017

Thanks for the contribution!

@fragmuffin fragmuffin deleted the feature/intersect branch September 11, 2017 03:37
@fragmuffin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@dcowden
what's the plan for the next (iterative) cadquery release?
would you like to synchronise it with the initial release of my cqparts lib?

I need to spend some more time on another project over the next few weeks, but I would like to have an alpha release of cqparts by the end of October

@dcowden
Copy link
Owner

dcowden commented Oct 7, 2017

@fragmuffin not sure there is a plan for release of the 1.x stream, but it is definitely time. Your parts library is awesome

Do you prefer to keep your library separate from cq, or would you be interested in bundling your code with cq?

@fragmuffin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@dcowden I feel like the overlap between cadquery and cqparts is minimal, which is an argument to keep them separate.
Of course cqparts has a huge dependency on cadquery (hence the cq prefix), but cadquery can stand alone without parts.
There's a simplicity to that I like. So I think I'd prefer to keep it separate.

Do you feel strongly about merging them?

@dcowden
Copy link
Owner

dcowden commented Oct 7, 2017

@fragmuffin, no definitely not, I just wanted to offer. Coordinated releases is fine with me. It would probably be easiest for users if we adopt common numbering.

@jmwright are you ready to do a call 1.x release soon?

@fragmuffin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you very much for your consideration @dcowden , that means a lot to me.
But yes; I would like to keep it separate 😃

@jmwright
Copy link
Collaborator

jmwright commented Oct 8, 2017

are you ready to do a call 1.x release soon?

We could release v1.1.0 any time. I was hoping to address issue #186 before the release, but I'm not sure I'm going to get to it.

@fragmuffin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jmwright well I'm in no rush.

out of curiosity, what's your release process?

I ask because I set up a semi-automated deployment for another PyPI package I wrote.
https://github.com/fragmuffin/pygcode/tree/master/deployment
Using this I can do a full test, sandbox deployment, test from sandbox, deploy to production, test from prod, all on py2 and py3. and I can do all of that in about 10min, with complete confidence.

would you be interested in something similar for cadquery?
I can easily put together a PR

@jmwright
Copy link
Collaborator

jmwright commented Oct 8, 2017

out of curiosity, what's your release process?

When we tag a release Travis will push it to PyPi. When we commit there's standard automated testing and coverage checks, but that's as far as it goes. The more we can automate our testing and release process the better in my mind. @dcowden understands how CI fits with CQ a lot better than I do though.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants