Hi all, +1 from me to go on with the release. Those bugs are the long-lasting ones, and don't seem to be easily fixed. As for pytest migration, I think we can't reschedule it for 0.13.1 or something. Most of the work is done there, we just need to re-iterate with the recent additions.
Regards, Egor 2017-03-25 19:55 GMT+03:00 Steven Silvester <steven.silves...@gmail.com>: > To be clear, I meant the 32 bit fixes. Happy to include Nelle's PR. > > > Sent from phone. > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Steven Silvester <steven.silves...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Saturday, March 25, 2017 11:53:26 AM > *To:* scikit-image@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....@python.org> on behalf of Johannes Schönberger <j...@demuc.de> > *Sent:* Saturday, March 25, 2017 11:47:22 AM > *To:* scikit-image@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.varoqu...@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.s...@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.varoqu...@gmail.com>, > wrote: > > > > On 25 March 2017 at 08:37, Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.s...@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@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image > > *_______________________________________________* > scikit-image mailing list > scikit-image@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image > > > > _______________________________________________ > scikit-image mailing list > scikit-image@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image > >
_______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list scikit-image@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image
