Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork366
3.1 release plan#3057
-
I'd like to use this discussion to sketch out a plan for a 3.1 release. This would be our first post-3.0 release with some breaking changes, so we should be sure that people know what's coming. Proposed changes for 3.1I've created a3.1 milestone, which so far is only labelled with PRs from me, but we should discuss which other efforts should be targeted for a 3.1 release. From my POV the main thing is the dtypes refactor, but we might want to slide other things in: for example, we may want to change some deprecation warnings to be more explicit about when the deprecated API will be removed (we can change language like "foo will be removed in the future" to "foo will be removed in the 3.2 release", for example. And I don't think there's a PR for this, but we should rethink our config (IMO an untyped, global, mutable dict is not ideal). Should we have a 3.1 branchShould we have a 3.1 branch? This would be convenient because we could merge PRs destined for 3.1, but it adds some complexity to our git workflow. Curious to hear people's thoughts here Pre-release activitiesWe should notify downstream users about this release, and we should issue a pre-release so we have time to sand off any sharp edges. In particular I think#2874 will benefit from hands-on testing. |
BetaWas this translation helpful?Give feedback.
All reactions
👍 1
Replies: 3 comments 2 replies
-
@zarr-developers/python-core-devs any thoughts here? in particular about the 3.1 branch idea |
BetaWas this translation helpful?Give feedback.
All reactions
-
i created a3.1.0 branch |
BetaWas this translation helpful?Give feedback.
All reactions
-
Not having a branch will make things a lot simpler, but once the first PR for 3.1 is merged to main it will prevent us making any more bugfix releases until we release 3.1. So if we do this, we should make sure the time between "first PR for 3.1 merged" and "3.1 release" is as short as possible. Another consideration is support - are we planning on supporting 3.0.x for a period after 3.1 is released? If so we will need a branch anyway. |
BetaWas this translation helpful?Give feedback.
All reactions
-
Hi all, I’m planning a new project based on Zarr 3, but need support for I will also check the contribution guide to see if I can help in any way. Thanks so much for all your hard work on Zarr, really appreciate the effort! |
BetaWas this translation helpful?Give feedback.
All reactions
-
@marek-kan those data types are already supported in zarr-python. see zarr-python/src/zarr/core/metadata/v3.py Lines 436 to 449 inf674236
As for timing the release, we definitely want to be done within the next few weeks. |
BetaWas this translation helpful?Give feedback.
All reactions
❤️ 1