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 0.17.0 #4894

Closed
4 of 6 tasks
dcherian opened this issue Feb 11, 2021 · 14 comments
Closed
4 of 6 tasks

release 0.17.0 #4894

dcherian opened this issue Feb 11, 2021 · 14 comments

Comments

@dcherian
Copy link
Contributor

dcherian commented Feb 11, 2021

Quoting @spencerkclark email:

Somewhat related to this issue, would others on the core team be open to making a new xarray release soon? In addition to the license change, this cftime update unintentionally introduced a change* that broke our encoding logic for cftime dates in a subtle way. I recently fixed this in #4871, but until a new xarray release is made, this issue makes it dangerous to use the latest non-GPL-licensed version of cftime.

These three seem like high-priority fixes. Thoughts?

Nice to have

@spencerkclark
Copy link
Member

Thanks @dcherian! I agree those would be good to get in too.

@alexamici
Copy link
Collaborator

alexamici commented Feb 12, 2021

The new flexible backend API is almost ready #4309 (see PRs with label CZI Grant) and the plan is for it to become the default backend API for the next major release (cc @shoyer @jhamman)

I'll prepare the PR to move the code in apiv2.py to api.py soon.

@dcherian do you have a target release date?

@dcherian
Copy link
Contributor Author

dcherian commented Feb 12, 2021

@alexamici no target date AFAIK. it'd be nice to release soon since there are incompatibilities with a few new library versions

@max-sixty
Copy link
Collaborator

Unless we're really confident that a feature is a few days away, I'd vote to generally proceed with releases. Releases are fairly cheap to do now (and I'm happy to do them), and uncoupling parts of the process lets it move faster.

Ofc if we have regressions, then we should solve those. (I have been under a crunch recently but can hopefully help more in a week or so)

@Illviljan
Copy link
Contributor

Illviljan commented Feb 14, 2021

May I suggest #4740 as well. I think it's ready and it helps me quite a bit in my 2k+ data variable use cases.

@dcherian
Copy link
Contributor Author

@max-sixty will cut a release this weekend. @alexamici can you get the PR in by then? If not, we can release again! and again!

@kmuehlbauer
Copy link
Contributor

kmuehlbauer commented Feb 17, 2021

@alexamici can you get the PR in by then?

This would be really great. But if it doesn't fit now, I hope a release will be cut right after finalising backend refactor. This is an eagerly awaited addition.

@alexamici
Copy link
Collaborator

I don't think we will be ready by this week-end and we don't want to rush the switch to the new API without some thorough testing by others. We will wait for the next release.

@kmuehlbauer
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think we will be ready by this week-end and we don't want to rush the switch to the new API without some thorough testing by others. We will wait for the next release.

No worries, @alexamici, as the API can be switched to v2 already, this is no major problem. Better safe than sorry wrt testing. Thank you and your colleagues!

@slevang
Copy link
Contributor

slevang commented Feb 18, 2021

#4849 should be almost ready to go. Would be good for someone else to confirm the API makes sense. Additional features and performance enhancements could be added in later releases as long as the API is acceptable.

@mathause
Copy link
Collaborator

There is a small mis-formatting in "whats-new", that would be good to fix: http://xarray.pydata.org/en/latest/whats-new.html

@keewis
Copy link
Collaborator

keewis commented Feb 21, 2021

There is a small mis-formatting in "whats-new"

if you're talking about the versions table: this should be fixed in #4907

@mathause
Copy link
Collaborator

Yes that's the one - thanks!

@dcherian
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @max-sixty !

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

No branches or pull requests

9 participants