[scikit-image] Gearing up for 0.13
Steven Silvester
steven.silvester at gmail.com
Sat Mar 25 12:55:15 EDT 2017
To be clear, I meant the 32 bit fixes. Happy to include Nelle's PR.
Sent from phone.
________________________________
From: Steven Silvester <steven.silvester at gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 11:53:26 AM
To: scikit-image at python.org; Johannes Schönberger
Subject: Re: [scikit-image] Gearing up for 0.13
+1 for a release without the testing fixes.
Sent from phone.
________________________________
From: scikit-image <scikit-image-bounces+steven.silvester=gmail.com at python.org> on behalf of Johannes Schönberger <jsch at demuc.de>
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 11:47:22 AM
To: scikit-image at python.org
Subject: Re: [scikit-image] Gearing up for 0.13
Trying to ship 0.13 sounds good to me! And those 32-bit bugs can be back-ported.
Cheers,
Johannes
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017, at 05:19 PM, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote:
That’s fine. My general approach is to merge things as they’re ready. That’s the point of continuous integration. =) Would you like to have a stab at the rebase? If you ping me here I’ll review ASAP.
CC list: sorry, I forgot to reply-all earlier. Full (tiny) thread below.
On 25 Mar 2017, 12:09 PM -0400, Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com>, wrote:
His point was that backporting would be easier if it was merged before.
On 25 March 2017 at 09:03, Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.soma at gmail.com<mailto:jni.soma at gmail.com>> wrote:
Oh! I thought the consensus was to have it *after* the release! #releasemanagerfail =P But it’s still on the 0.14 milestone. And looking at the comments it’s not clear that he wanted that? Anyway, I’m personally happy to merge if a rebase fixes the failing travis build.
On 25 Mar 2017, 11:57 AM -0400, Nelle Varoquaux <nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com<mailto:nelle.varoquaux at gmail.com>>, wrote:
On 25 March 2017 at 08:37, Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.soma at gmail.com<mailto:jni.soma at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
We’ve had these two 32-bit blockers<https://github.com/scikit-image/scikit-image/milestone/6> holding up 0.13 for a couple of months now. Importantly, both of these bugs:
- existed in 0.12
- are only testing bugs, not actual bugs (as far as I can tell)
Therefore, I’ve proposed to ship 0.13.0 before fixing them. When we do fix them, we can back-port to 0.13.1/2/3. Stéfan was on board with this plan. If there are no objections, I’ll get the ball rolling shortly on the release. But, I wanted to give people a chance to comment on the decision before starting. =)
Stéfan wanted my pytest PR in before the release. Is that still the case?
Cheers,
N
Juan.
_______________________________________________
scikit-image mailing list
scikit-image at python.org<mailto:scikit-image at python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image
_______________________________________________
scikit-image mailing list
scikit-image at python.org<mailto:scikit-image at python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-image/attachments/20170325/2d58a2c1/attachment.html>
More information about the scikit-image
mailing list