xarray-contrib / xarray-contrib/pint-xarray
switch to CalVer?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 119
- Forks
- 15
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Our release policy very much follows that of xarray: deprecations will stay in a few releases, after which they will be applied (for example, removing old features or changing defaults).
This makes it somewhat difficult to choose the new version (when do we bump the which part of the version), and in my experience is often done somewhat arbitrarily. In addition, the version scheme is often confused with SemVer, which is not what we're doing.
With CalVer this is very easy: the version is always YYYY.0M.X, and if there's multiple releases per month we just have to increase X (for example, if there were bugs in the release).
As such, I would like to propose following xarray and switching to CalVer. What do you think?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing the repository’s current release and versioning process, then compare it with xarray’s CalVer approach. The issue does not name files, tests, or an implementation entry point; done would require a project decision on adopting YYYY.0M.X and how that policy handles deprecations and multiple releases per month.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- release
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100