[Pdl-porters] PDL 2.008

[Ed .]

Chris and pdl-porters,

I note that the announcement of the plan for a 2.008 release in January was on perldl, and apparently not on pdl-porters. Am I confused about which list does what?

Also, what is the plan for whether to include the Inline/EUD code in 2.008? Is there any action required from me to assist with that? The code is on a branch by itself, and it is not on master.

Best regards,
Ed J

[Chris Marshall]

Post by Ed .
Chris and pdl-porters,
I note that the announcement of the plan for a 2.008 release in January
was on perldl, and apparently not on pdl-porters. Am I confused about which
list does what?

pdl-porters is for development specific discussion while perldl is for the
more general user questions. Since the preparation for a new release is of
general interest and since users may have things they want addressed and
since pdl-porters read perldl, I sent to perldl alone rather than
cross-posting to both lists.

Post by Ed .
Also, what is the plan for whether to include the Inline/EUD code in
2.008? Is there any action required from me to assist with that? The code
is on a branch by itself, and it is not on master.

See this post
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/pipermail//pdl-porters/2014-December/006503.html
under the ExtUtils::Depends bullet.

Cheers,
Chris

[Ed .]

Post by Chris Marshall

Post by Ed .
I note that the announcement of the plan for a 2.008 release in January
was on perldl, and apparently not on pdl-porters. Am I confused about
which list does what?

pdl-porters is for development specific discussion while perldl is for the
more general user questions. Since the preparation for a new release is
of general interest and since users may have things they want addressed
and since pdl-porters read perldl, I sent to perldl alone rather than
cross-posting to both lists.

Not all pdl-porters read perldl. Seems this would have been a perfect thing
to cross-post.

Post by Chris Marshall

Post by Ed .
Also, what is the plan for whether to include the Inline/EUD code in
2.008? Is there any action required from me to assist with that? The code
is on a branch by itself, and it is not on master.

See this post
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/pipermail//pdl-porters/2014-December/006503.html
under the ExtUtils::Depends bullet.

I did read it - you said "in 2.008 or sooner with help". Given that it's
been released in 2.007_04, but isn't on master, how can it be released
sooner than 2.008? I'm offering to help with the git clean-up, but it's
increasingly obvious that you don't want that, at least from me.

[Chris Marshall]

Post by Ed .
I note that the announcement of the plan for a 2.008 release in January

Post by Ed .
was on perldl, and apparently not on pdl-porters. Am I confused about which
list does what?

pdl-porters is for development specific discussion while perldl is for

the more general user questions. Since the preparation for a new release
is of general interest and since users may have things they want addressed
and since pdl-porters read perldl, I sent to perldl alone rather than
cross-posting to both lists.

Not all pdl-porters read perldl. Seems this would have been a perfect
thing to cross-post.
Also, what is the plan for whether to include the Inline/EUD code in

Post by Ed .
2.008? Is there any action required from me to assist with that? The code
is on a branch by itself, and it is not on master.

See this post http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/pipermail//pdl-porters/

2014-December/006503.html under the ExtUtils::Depends bullet.

I did read it - you said "in 2.008 or sooner with help". Given that it's
been released in 2.007_04, but isn't on master, how can it be released
sooner than 2.008? I'm offering to help with the git clean-up, but it's
increasingly obvious that you don't want that, at least from me.

The point was that it is planned for PDL-2.008.

The sooner was with regards to cleaning up the git situation and putting
the ExtUtils::Depends mods into the master correctly.

I have appreciated the help with git you've already contributed. Maybe
I've been too focused on git purity rather than getting the job done.
Since I already made git-mess of your EUD work for the PDL-2.007_04
developers release, how would you feel about making your EUD changes
against master HEAD and getting back on track for PDL-2.008?

Regards,
Chris

[Ed .]

Post by Chris Marshall
The point was that it is planned for PDL-2.008.
The sooner was with regards to cleaning up the git situation and putting the ExtUtils::Depends mods into the master correctly.
I have appreciated the help with git you've already contributed. Maybe I've been too focused on git purity rather than getting the job done. Since I already made git-mess of your EUD work for the PDL-2.007_04 developers release, how would you feel about making your EUD changes against master HEAD and getting back on track for PDL-2.008?

New MR: https://sourceforge.net/p/pdl/code/merge-requests/12/

Git purity is good, but that’s a separate issue. To summarise a #pdl discussion today: I propose that xenofur/Mithaldu/Christian Walde is highly qualified to do the git cleanup, so long as parameters are agreed in advance to achieve agreement by the other major stakeholders. I think the parameters should be "master stays as is, but all other branches are subject to rebasing to clean up their history". Naturally, I'm volunteering to do this as well, though I think it vastly unlikely I’ll be granted access to do so.
We really do need a git masterclass. It’s really not difficult to do basic things, and all that’s needed for normal dev is basic things: make a topic branch, work on it, keep your master separately up to date, and periodically rebase (NOT MERGE) your topic branch against master. That’s literally it.
Ed