search

ejeschke / ginga

The Ginga astronomical FITS file viewer
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
120 stars 77 forks source link

Release 5.0 #1053

Closed ejeschke closed 5 months ago

ejeschke commented 1 year ago

ToDo list:

ejeschke commented 1 year ago

Skip #805 as it is likely to never be merged in favor of something implementing #1056

ejeschke commented 1 year ago

@pllim, I'm thinking for v5.0 we should update the requirements for python (3.7 => 3.8), astropy (3.2 => 4.2) and numpy (1.14 => 1.22). What do you think?

pllim commented 1 year ago

astropy 4.2 is pretty old. Is there a reason why you cannot bump it to 5.x ?

ejeschke commented 1 year ago

When is the end of support for 4.2? I mostly don't want to pull the rug out from anyone that is stuck in an older set of packages. This is true for some observatories, especially. Although our main observing software is using astropy 5.x, some of the instruments and their pipelines are stuck in older versions.

pllim commented 1 year ago

astropy 4.x reached EOL when astropy 5.0 came out, so that was back in Jan 27, 2022. And we will stop supporting 5.x when we release astropy 6.0 at the end of 2023 (after about 2 years since release). As per APE 21, starting in 6.0, we no longer do LTS, so that means 6.0 is not guaranteed to receive bugfix for the next 2 years (it might but we just don't make that promise anymore). Hope this clarifies the matter.

ejeschke commented 1 year ago

I followed that "dropping LTS" discussion with interest. I suppose we can bump up the requirement to 5.0.

pllim commented 1 year ago

If you bump to astropy 5.x, Python 3.8 and numpy 1.22 sound reasonable. I just cannot say for astropy 4.x because we have not been testing it for over a year.

ejeschke commented 1 year ago

Following bump to python 3.8, I think we can change this module in the same update.

ejeschke commented 9 months ago

As author of the these PRs, I request not to merge #761 (needs more testing with current version) and #1015 (not full ready, IMO) for release 5.0

ejeschke commented 9 months ago

SInce there doesn't seem much interest in #813, I suggest to not merge that for release 5.0 as well.

pllim commented 9 months ago

We played with the idea of plugging in reproject into Jdaviz too but abandoned it because it is too resource intensive.

ejeschke commented 6 months ago

Kicking the can on #698, #823 and #940 down the road for possible resolution in a future release.

ejeschke commented 5 months ago

Released! (or should I say "Unleashed" :smile_cat: )