Skip to content
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

Standardize with scikit-package v0.1.0 #44

Open
bobleesj opened this issue Jan 8, 2025 · 2 comments
Open

Standardize with scikit-package v0.1.0 #44

bobleesj opened this issue Jan 8, 2025 · 2 comments

Comments

@bobleesj
Copy link

bobleesj commented Jan 8, 2025

No description provided.

@vincefn
Copy link
Collaborator

vincefn commented Jan 9, 2025

Can you be more specific ?

@sbillinge
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @vincefn . This refers to our process for taking our pacakages to the new group standards for CI, linting and releasing. We used to call this process "cookiecutting" because we were using the cookiecutter package, but we are moving towards writing a paper and a package to help other scientific python groups adopt similar strategies, so now the process is called scikit-package.

The exemplar package is diffpy.utils if you want to take a look. For pyobjcryst, we could do it where we merge the cookiecutting work into a branch called cookie or package or whatever we decide, and you can make sure that everything meets your approval before anything is merged into main.

All of our diffpy packages we have been putting into the diffpy namesspace (so they are called diffpy.<package-name>. Pavol started this process, but we are conforming everything else. We could decide if we want to do this or not for pyobjcryst. Since it has a fairly large user-group we probably don't want to change how it is installed and used, or at least to allow it to continue to be installed as it is. Our cookiecutting process can do it either way. One advantage of doing it is just standdardizing the release management across our family of packages. But let's discuss this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants