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

Release 2.1.0 #3446

Closed
4 of 5 tasks
IAlibay opened this issue Oct 28, 2021 · 17 comments · Fixed by #3553
Closed
4 of 5 tasks

Release 2.1.0 #3446

IAlibay opened this issue Oct 28, 2021 · 17 comments · Fixed by #3553
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member

IAlibay commented Oct 28, 2021

With the release of python 3.10, we should make a minor release that covers python 3.7 before we have to consider ditching it.

It's shorter than our proposed "maximum every 6 months" release schedule, but it wouldn't help to get this out quickly so we can move up in minimum supported python versions.

That being said - I know we agreed that we would stick with NEP29, but maybe we should be a bit lenient and do a release that spans 4 python versions when faced with these types of cases. Otherwise we'll have an MDAnalysis version out there that's not been explicitly tested against py3.10.

Thoughts @MDAnalysis/coredevs ?

The next question is, what needs to be done before the 2.1.0 release? Please raise things in the comments and I'll make a list here.

Things urgently needed:

@orbeckst orbeckst added this to the 2.1.0 milestone Oct 28, 2021
@orbeckst
Copy link
Member

Would we want #3437 fixed for 2.1.0? It looks like a pretty annoying thing for anyone who's doing topology hacking for the common case to add chain information.

@richardjgowers
Copy link
Member

Yeah #3440 is a bug fix that's ready to go so I've added it to the checklist.

#3441 would be nice as it's a segfault which are generally nice to avoid. I think we're just stumbling around figuring out how/if to test that issue, but the fix is done at least.

#3445 is a fairly minor addition that shouldn't be too hard to review?

@hmacdope
Copy link
Member

Is #2989 still under consideration for 2.1.0? It is tagged as so in the PR.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Oct 31, 2021

Is #2989 still under consideration for 2.1.0? It is tagged as so in the PR.

No. Cython 3 is still in alpha releases, I'll push it to 2.2.0 but I think it might be a breaking change that'll have to be held off until 3.0.0.

@richardjgowers
Copy link
Member

The XTC offset fixing seems complete, but I think the tests for it are probably going to be more/as complicated as the fix. I think it might have to get bumped.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Nov 9, 2021

Thanks for keeping up with that one @richardjgowers - there's a couple of small PRs that could probably get fixed this week so I'm going to aim to release this weekend.

@hima111997
Copy link

when will 2.1 be released?

@jbarnoud
Copy link
Contributor

@hima111997 We hope to release it soon. There are a couple of things we would like to fix before the release, sadly we all are quite busy.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Feb 22, 2022

We've sat on this too long. I'm proposing a hard feature freeze of this Sunday - with a release on Monday (unless there's any game breaking bugs).

@MDAnalysis/coredevs here are the things that need to be pushed:

#3527 is pretty important for us to deal with (otherwise we might not be able to build because of the extra packaging import), so I'll concentrate efforts on that for now.

@jbarnoud
Copy link
Contributor

jbarnoud commented Mar 4, 2022

If possible, I'd like #2857 to go in.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Mar 4, 2022

I really want to get started on the rise process before the end of the day, is that a realistic time frame?

@jbarnoud
Copy link
Contributor

jbarnoud commented Mar 4, 2022

It is mostly stuck by @orbeckst request for changes, that should be out of date. Otherwise, I guess I'll be good to change all the versionchanged for the next version 🤷

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Mar 4, 2022

I've pinged @richardjgowers for a review, @orbeckst would you have time? I'll try to give it a review in a bit and we can just merge it. I'll yield on the deadline and just say "as long as it makes it in by midnight today".

@orbeckst
Copy link
Member

orbeckst commented Mar 4, 2022

I re-reviewed #2857 and some of the older comments that looked out of date because of nearby code changes are still valid. It's only minor doc things, though.

@jbarnoud
Copy link
Contributor

jbarnoud commented Mar 4, 2022

I won't have time to fix that by the end of today. Let's re-target for 2.2.0.

@orbeckst
Copy link
Member

orbeckst commented Mar 5, 2022

I am ok with #2857 now, assuming that tests pass.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Mar 5, 2022

I am ok with #2857 now, assuming that tests pass.

Ok cool, let's get it merged and then I'll start the release process later this evening.

@IAlibay IAlibay mentioned this issue Mar 6, 2022
2 tasks
IAlibay added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 7, 2022
Fixes #3446 
* Complete release v2.1.0
* officially advertise py3.10 support
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants