search

pangeo-data / xESMF

Universal Regridder for Geospatial Data
http://xesmf.readthedocs.io/
MIT License
183 stars 32 forks source link

PyPI distribution name #183

Closed zklaus closed 1 year ago

zklaus commented 1 year ago

In using xesmf, we run into a problem because the distribution name on PyPI now is pangeo-xesmf, but the distribution name on the Github releases as well as the conda-forge releases is xesmf. That means that there is no consistent way to specify the xesmf dependency in both setup.py for pip installability and conda-forge's meta.yml for conda-forge installs.

I understand that there is a problem due to the ownership of the project on PyPI, but do you see a way forward to homogenize this again?

By and large, there are two possible solutions: Commit to the new pangeo-xesmf name and use it also for the Github releases and on conda-forge, or gain ownership of the xesmf project on PyPI, which, failing availability of the project owners usually can be achieved by contacting the PyPI admins.

In both cases, the conda-forge packages could be built from the Pypi distributions again.

huard commented 1 year ago

We now have ownership of PyPI xesmf. We just need to push xesmf to PyPI, but I'm running into problems with the SCM version. @ocefpaf do you have some time to look into how to push 0.7 to PyPI ?

ocefpaf commented 1 year ago

We now have ownership of PyPI xesmf.

That's swesome!

@ocefpaf do you have some time to look into how to push 0.7 to PyPI ?

Yep. I'll look into it this afternoon.

zklaus commented 1 year ago

This is great :tada: Gave us a real headache for quite some time.

huard commented 1 year ago

xesmf 0.7.1 is now on PyPI.

@ocefpaf I don't think the procedure to push to conda works now however. https://xesmf.readthedocs.io/en/latest/releases.html

zklaus commented 1 year ago

In conda-forge/xesmf-feedstock#30 I propose to go back to the PyPI releases as a source for Conda-forge (which is generally preferred). If adopted, that would mean that the procedure should work, though some steps become superfluous.

ocefpaf commented 1 year ago

If adopted, that would mean that the procedure should work, though some steps become superfluous.

Yep. Here is my suggestion for a workflow but take that with a grain of salt b/c what works for someone may not work for others.

  1. Retire the CHANGES.rst file b/c that is prone to errors and/or go stale;
  2. Rely on GH UI to mint the release and populated the release notes/changelog;
  3. Steps 2-4, 6 remain the same but no other action is required after that. The workflow should update the PyPI package automatic and then the conda-forge bot should pick it up.
huard commented 1 year ago

Opened a new issue to update the docs.