Skip to content
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

Don't conflict with HasHDF in StructureStorage #376

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 7, 2021
Merged

Don't conflict with HasHDF in StructureStorage #376

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 7, 2021

Conversation

pmrv
Copy link
Contributor

@pmrv pmrv commented Sep 28, 2021

Drops support for legacy storage format.

afaik, the old format of saving StructureStorage to HDF is no longer used and therefore drop it, could this bite you in some way @Leimeroth ?

Depends #375

Drops support for legacy storage format
@pmrv pmrv added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 28, 2021
@Leimeroth
Copy link
Member

I think I loaded all jobs that used this and rewrote hdf files using to_hdf() manually at some point, but I will have to check.
Even if there are some problems I guess it would still be possible to load and rewrite old jobs using an older version if you merge this and than switch back to the new version or am I overlooking something?

@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1282030235

  • 2 of 2 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.02%) to 69.779%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 1279860898: 0.02%
Covered Lines: 11413
Relevant Lines: 16356

💛 - Coveralls

@pmrv
Copy link
Contributor Author

pmrv commented Sep 28, 2021

I think I loaded all jobs that used this and rewrote hdf files using to_hdf() manually at some point, but I will have to check.
Even if there are some problems I guess it would still be possible to load and rewrite old jobs using an older version if you merge this and than switch back to the new version or am I overlooking something?

Yeah, downgrading pyiron temporarily, rewriting and then upgrading should be no problem.

@pmrv pmrv added the integration Start the notebook integration tests for this PR label Oct 4, 2021
@pmrv pmrv marked this pull request as ready for review October 7, 2021 14:00
@pmrv pmrv merged commit 8a54663 into master Oct 7, 2021
@delete-merged-branch delete-merged-branch bot deleted the struct branch October 7, 2021 14:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request integration Start the notebook integration tests for this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants