new release?

[jameslamb]

Thanks for maintaining this awesome package! I'm really digging it.

Would you consider doing a minor release to PyPi? The last one (1.10.0) was about 6 months ago, and I'm relying on installing from GitHub right now to get this fix: #40

Thanks for your time and consideration

[TomAugspurger]

I can do one today or next week. Anything you want to get in first @gforsyth?

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 2:02 PM James Lamb notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks for maintaining this awesome package! I'm really digging it.

Would you consider doing a minor release to PyPi? The last one (1.10.0) was about 6 months ago https://github.com/dask/dask-xgboost/releases/tag/0.1.10, and I'm relying on installing from GitHub right now to get this fix: #40 https://github.com/dask/dask-xgboost/pull/40

Thanks for your time and consideration

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/dask/dask-xgboost/issues/75, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAKAOISHGWI3VX2RWHBKJKLR6BW53ANCNFSM4PL5NHNQ .

[gforsyth]

Thanks for the ping @TomAugspurger -- I think @mmccarty covered the major footguns in his PR. One thing we need to do following the pypi release is to update the conda-forge feedstock and pin xgboost to 0.90 (or <=0.90)

[jakirkham]

Should this line also be <=0.90?

[mmccarty]

If we want to pin xgboost to <=0.90, yes.

[gforsyth]

I was in the middle of answering this on Friday and then got distracted (sorry).

I think <=0.90 is probably the way to go. There is probably some low version that will break, but we can cross that bridge if and when we come to it, and there's no reason to exclude 0.80 for the moment.

[TomAugspurger]

Uploaded to PyPI. conda-forge bots should pick it up later today.

[jameslamb]

Thanks!