Skip to content

v0.14.1 Release #3434

Closed
Closed

Description

@crusaderky

I think with the multiple recent breakages we've just had due to dependency upgrades, we should push out a patch release with some haste.

Please comment/add/object

Must have

Nice to have

Activity

  1. dcherian commented on Oct 22, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    #3406 needs a review

  2. mathause commented on Oct 28, 2019

    @mathause
    Collaborator

    Would be nice to get this out - just hit #3426. (I now updated to master but this is besides the point).

  3. crusaderky commented on Oct 29, 2019

    @crusaderky
    ContributorAuthor

    @mathause I'm personally really uncomfortable pushing out a release when there are multiple known breakages against dependencies - see Must have list. Help is welcome!

  4. crusaderky commented on Oct 29, 2019

    @crusaderky
    ContributorAuthor

    @barronh any update re pseudonetcdf 3.1?

  5. barronh commented on Oct 31, 2019

    @barronh
    Contributor

    I believe there are two issues here.

    First, the 3.1 release was not 2.7 compliant. It mixed named keyword arguments with **kwds. That could be fixed easily.

    Second, the camx reader changed subclasses, which affects the xarray test for CF variables. I could update the test that would fix xarray test-case.

  6. crusaderky commented on Oct 31, 2019

    @crusaderky
    ContributorAuthor

    @barronh, we don't care about Python 2.7 compliance. We support >=3.6.

  7. barronh commented on Nov 4, 2019

    @barronh
    Contributor

    Got it. This is a test update to a test that is backward and forward compatible. I'll get something checked in.

  8. mathause commented on Nov 5, 2019

    @mathause
    Collaborator

    xref for numpy 1.18 numpy/numpy#14831

  9. dcherian commented on Nov 5, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    @mathause Thanks for filing these upstream issues!

  10. dcherian commented on Nov 7, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    Once #3491 is merged, we should be ready to release since numpy will fix itself (numpy/numpy#14841)

  11. mathause commented on Nov 7, 2019

    @mathause
    Collaborator

    Don't we have to figure out whether to use np.mean or np.nanmean for datetime vectors?

  12. dcherian commented on Nov 11, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    I'm in favour of releasing even if we are currently broken with numpy master.

    Our current release is also broken with numpy master, so the situation is no worse...

  13. crusaderky commented on Nov 15, 2019

    @crusaderky
    ContributorAuthor

    If someone could review and merge #3537 and #3531, we can close this!

  14. crusaderky commented on Nov 19, 2019

    @crusaderky
    ContributorAuthor

    I think we're good to go!

  15. dcherian commented on Nov 19, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    I agree! @crusaderky, @max-sixty: do either of you have the time to make a release?

  16. max-sixty commented on Nov 19, 2019

    @max-sixty
    Collaborator

    Yup I can do it later this afternoon!

  17. dcherian commented on Nov 19, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    👍

  18. dcherian commented on Nov 19, 2019

    @dcherian
    Contributor

    Thanks @max-sixty I activated the RTD build.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions