Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #3553 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 94.10% 94.11% +0.01%
===========================================
Files 190 190
Lines 24656 24656
Branches 3309 3309
===========================================
+ Hits 23202 23206 +4
+ Misses 1408 1404 -4
Partials 46 46
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Test versions of 2.1.0 are now on testpypi, if you have spare time please pip install them and run tests (particularly if you have a macOS machine since I can't test that). Instructions are: # install MDA 2.1.0
pip install --index-url https://test.pypi.org/simple/ --extra-index-url https://pypi.org/simple MDAnalysis
# install MDAtests 2.1.0
pip install --index-url https://test.pypi.org/simple/ --extra-index-url https://pypi.org/simple MDAnalysisTests
# Run tests
pytest --pyargs MDAnalysisTests 2>&1 | tee mda-test-release.logsPlease report any failures and relevant log bits as required. |
|
Versions to check before we merge
extras:
|
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
@IAlibay I can do py3.10 and py 3.17 MacOS if that would help? |
please that would be useful |
|
@IAlibay I assume you mean 3.7 for "3.17"? EDIT: EDIT: |
|
Things to do:
Then we should be good to go |
|
Ok that should be everything. @richardjgowers can you review as previous / maybe still current lord of the releases? |
richardjgowers
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@IAlibay lgtm. The only thing I sometimes did for releases was regenerate all .c files from their .pyx equivalent, but now we're depending on Cython this isn't necessary.
So Cython isn't a core dependency as far as I'm aware, maybe we need to re-discuss this. |
|
Ok so it turns out we probably want to keep the C/C++ files somewhere on github so we have a record of them somewhere. Current plan is to do:
Thoughts @MDAnalysis/coredevs ? (@jbarnoud probably had some views on this?) In the future the aim would be to just make Cython a core dependency hopefully? |
|
It might be better to tag the commit that has the C files if it is the one from which the packages will be produced. But that is really nothing but a "might". |
|
I thought @jbarnoud 's comment made sense: branch release-2.1.0, create everything that goes into the package, then tag the package stuff (and because the tag is associated with the release on GitHub, one can also download a tarball from GH that contains "everything"). |
|
Following up from discord: Having a tag on develop is really useful for benchmarking and other diff-based operations such as bisection. Perhaps we can instead
(Or something along these lines — the main point is that we have the freedom to introduce different tags and that we can choose them as to disrupt procedures as little as possible.) |
orbeckst
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is good to sit on develop with an appropriate tag to mark the 0.2.1-feature complete state.
See ongoing discussion on how to tag this merge commit.
Fixes #3446
Please do review but don't merge yet. This PR ties off version 2.1.0, but we want to make sure that testpypi looks fine.
@MDAnalysis/coredevs this means that we are completely commit frozen until after this PR is completed, tags are created and the PR starting 2.2.0-dev0 is merged. Should be ~ day or so.
Changes made in this Pull Request:
PR Checklist