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

MAINT: Release 0.21 #8150

Closed
larsoner opened this issue Aug 24, 2020 · 23 comments
Closed

MAINT: Release 0.21 #8150

larsoner opened this issue Aug 24, 2020 · 23 comments
Milestone

Comments

@larsoner
Copy link
Member

larsoner commented Aug 24, 2020

We should cut a release in a few weeks, tentatively scheduled for September 15th. Feel free to tag issues and PRs that realistically can and should make it if you have permissions, and if you don't, feel free to comment on ones that you think should be tagged for 0.21.

@larsoner larsoner added this to the 0.21 milestone Aug 24, 2020
@agramfort
Copy link
Member

agramfort commented Aug 24, 2020 via email

@dengemann
Copy link
Member

September 15 ? @larsoner

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

Whoops, yes I meant Sept 15th :)

@hoechenberger
Copy link
Member

hoechenberger commented Sep 16, 2020

We need to draft an announcement. Also with the last release we had this small video clip demonstrating the new Time Viewer. We should do a similar demo of some notable features in 0.21 as well. Which are the most notable new features?

@hoechenberger
Copy link
Member

@cbrnr
Copy link
Contributor

cbrnr commented Sep 16, 2020

Maybe mne.io.read_raw #7809 is also worth mentioning as a QoL improvement.

@hoechenberger
Copy link
Member

From the chanelog:

  • Add 'auto' option to mne.preprocessing.ICA.find_bads_ecg() to automatically determine the threshold for CTPS method by Yu-Han Luo
  • Add a notebook 3d backend for visualization in jupyter notebook with mne.viz.set_3d_backend() by Guillaume Favelier
  • Use PyVista as the default backend for 3D visualization instead of Mayavi by Guillaume Favelier

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

BTW we are not ready to release, I'm still doing battle with CircleCI

@cbrnr
Copy link
Contributor

cbrnr commented Sep 16, 2020

@hoechenberger since we're already discussing the release, did you have time to work on an mne-base package in conda-forge by any chance? I think this would be pretty useful, because the standard package is really quite bloated if all you need is basic EEG analysis tools.

@hoechenberger
Copy link
Member

@cbrnr Yes, in conda-forge/mne-feedstock#37
I stopped at some point, I believe there were some difficulties, but cannot remember any details! Would be happy to try picking this up again. But not before the weekend.

@drammock
Copy link
Member

If possible I'd like us to start highlighting the contributions of new-to-mne developers in our release announcements. At a minimum, maybe "there were N contributions from M first-time contributors in this release cycle". Better would be to also give examples and call out their names.

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe we should start this process by bolding the entries in the latest.inc?

@drammock
Copy link
Member

That could work, although I wonder if folks read the whole changelog (i.e., would bolding actually increase visibility if it's not being read?)

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

Some people might, either way they get more visible and next time it's easier to know which entries we should add based on being from new contributors next time. To be clear, I'm suggesting that we just start by doing the bolding in master (and make this what we try to do going forward) -- the next step is to use this bolding to facilitate adding to the release notes for this release.

@drammock
Copy link
Member

Ah, got it. Seems like a good approach

@cbrnr
Copy link
Contributor

cbrnr commented Sep 16, 2020

Should we also add the related PRs to all new entries? This would be very handy for people who would like to dig into the corresponding code changes.

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

larsoner commented Sep 16, 2020

Should we also add the related PRs to all new entries? This would be very handy for people who would like to dig into the corresponding code changes.

If someone wants to do this, feel free. I'm not up for it, I suspect it's going to take some time... the fastest way I can think of is to look at the git blame page of our latest.inc and you'll probably get most of the PR numbers from each line, though some will have to be manually adjusted / searched for due to rebases, merges, typo fixes, etc.

Another option going forward in other repos I've used is to have maintainers ensure that the title of the PR is good and that it's tagged with enhancement or bug, and we would probably want to add/use a custom api tag. Then the changelog can be automatically generated before release EDIT: with github changelog generator.

@cbrnr
Copy link
Contributor

cbrnr commented Sep 16, 2020

I was thinking of adding the PR only for new changes going forward - I wouldn't want to do it for all changes (in 0.21) either. As long as we manually create changelog entries, it should not be too much effort for the contributor to also add the corresponding PR. If there is a way to automatically generate the complete changelog - yes, we should go for it, but this seems like it will probably need more time until it works.

@sappelhoff
Copy link
Member

we are doing this "manual" changelog with PR links in MNE-BIDS, see changelog.

I would be in favor of continuing the changelog manually and simply adding a PR link "on top". The effort is low, and the benefit is tangible.

re: automatic changelog generation --> would it save a lot of time? would it be of an equally high quality? ... or will it turn out to be a lot of work for something that's "almost as good as manual"?

@larsoner
Copy link
Member Author

would it be of an equally high quality?

This is an automatically generated one:

https://sphinx-gallery.github.io/stable/changes.html

So basically we would set the PR title to what we want the changelog entry to be, and instead of putting it in a section we tag it with a GitHub label. So the quality depends on how nicely you format your PR titles.

would it save a lot of time?

In general it does save work for contributors because there is no need for rebase/merge due to latest.inc conflicts. For maintainers it only adds a couple minutes during release. So I see it as a net time saver.

One downside I see is that you really only get it on release rather than continuously. But perhaps worse, we would lose the names linking, so probably not worth it

@hoechenberger
Copy link
Member

If possible I'd like us to start highlighting the contributions of new-to-mne developers in our release announcements.

I just wanted to share that I very much like this idea, particularly in the context of #8221

@rob-luke
Copy link
Member

Which are the most notable new features?

Its probably not as widely used as the features hoechenberger highlighted, but support for NIRS over 0.20 and 0.21 has increased. Slight bias here.

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

8 participants