-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
v0.12.0 release planning #2407
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
Comments
Not really addressing what you're asking but worth mentioning. I plan to implement several breaking changes in the iotools module to bring more consistency. This I hope to have released before the PVSC pvlib tutorial in early June |
Yes. And if Adam immediately introduces more breaking changes then we move on to 0.13 (no need to dwell on 0.12.x series). |
No objections from me to make the next release v0.12. I marked #2343 for v0.13 thinking we should deprecate |
Ok, I moved the 0.11.3 items to 0.12.0, renamed 0.11.4 to 0.12.1, and deleted the 0.11.3 milestone. Looks like @echedey-ls, @RDaxini, and @AdamRJensen already have PRs started for some of these items. Let's try to get those and the rest of the 0.12.0 removals done so that 0.12.0 can be released sometime next week. |
Let's not, to keep 0.12 on track for release. |
+1 from me, but it's not a breaking code change and can easily wait for the next release if time is a constraint |
Thanks @kandersolar ! Just in time for the monthly NumFocus update too! |
The v0.11.3 milestone is cleared out and the release is ready to finalize. Along the way, we've merged some PRs including what we're calling breaking changes:
pvlib-python/docs/sphinx/source/whatsnew/v0.11.3.rst
Lines 7 to 14 in 40a213b
Our versioning strategy says that including such changes mean we should call this release 0.12.0 instead of 0.11.3. However, we have several deprecations marked to be removed in 0.12: #2396
@pvlib/pvlib-maintainer @pvlib/pvlib-triage your input is requested: should we call this release 0.12.0 and get some final PRs in to address those deprecations?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: