On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:43 AM, Charles R Harris > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Charles R Harris > >>> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> > wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> On Oct 8, 2015 5:39 PM, "Charles R Harris" < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> > >>> >> wrote: > >>> >> > > >>> >> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Matthew Brett > >>> >> > <matthew.br...@gmail.com> > >>> >> > wrote: > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Hi, > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> I'm afraid I made a mistake uploading OSX wheels for numpy > 1.10.0. > >>> >> >> Using twine to do the upload generated a new release - > 1.10.0.post2 > >>> >> >> - > >>> >> >> containing only the wheels. I deleted that new release to avoid > >>> >> >> confusion, but now, when I try and upload the wheels to the > 1.10.0 > >>> >> >> pypi release via the web form, I get this error: > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Error processing form > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> This filename has previously been used, you should use a > different > >>> >> >> version. > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Any chance of a post3 upload so I can upload some matching > wheels? > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> Sorry about that, > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > Yeah, pipy is why we are on post2 already. Given the problem with > >>> >> > msvc9, > >>> >> > I think we are due for 1.10.1 in a day or two. Or, I could revert > >>> >> > the > >>> >> > troublesome commit and do a post3 tomorrow. Hmm... decisions, > >>> >> > decisions. > >>> >> > I'll see if Julian has anything to say in the morning and go from > >>> >> > there. > >>> >> > >>> >> I vote that we increment the micro number every time we upload a new > >>> >> source release, and reserve the postN suffix for binary-only > uploads. > >>> >> If > >>> >> this means we have a tiny 1.10.1 then oh well, there's always 1.10.2 > >>> >> -- we > >>> >> probably won't run out of numbers :-). > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > The only difference between 1.10.0 and 1.10.0.post2 is that the > latter > >>> > is > >>> > signed. Sigh. We need to capture this experience in the HOWTO_RELEASE > >>> > document. Matthew, can you take care of that? > >>> > >>> Is the summary this: > >>> > >>> * never have an actual numpy version .postN; > >>> * releases always have source with a clean Major.Minor.Micro release > >>> number; > >>> * binary packages for Minor.Minor.Micro release numbers may have > >>> filenames ending in .postN > >> > >> > >> The few times in the past when we've needed to fix a binary, we've just > >> re-uploaded it with the same name. This seems much preferable to me than > >> confusing users with a post-fix on PyPi that doesn't even match > >> ``numpy.__version__`` and that is so uncommon that I've never seen it > used > >> anywhere. > >> > >> If re-uploading with the same name is now disallowed by PyPi (is it?) > then > >> bumping the micro version number as Nathaniel proposes would be the way > to > >> go imho. > > > > > > You are not allowed to reuse a file name, and numpy.__version__ must > match > > the file name or pip install will fail. This has all been a bit of > > experimentation and I think we have learned something. Agree about not > using > > the `.postN` suffix. I expect we will have fewer problems next time > around. > > OK - any chance of a 1.10.1 release urgently? Otherwise the wheel > installs don't work on OSX... > Working on it. There is a problem with msvc9 that needs to be addressed, otherwise it would be out already. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
