-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
Track merging datatree into xarray #8572
Comments
I think this will require temporarily moving the datatree repository to the pydata org then transferring issues one at a time to the xarray repo. I can help with the repo move when the time comes.
There are various ways to do this and I think it would be worth attempting. It would help preserve some of the iteration that datatree went through and make sure the attribution is carried through. This blog post explains one way to do this: https://gfscott.com/blog/merge-git-repos-and-keep-commit-history/ |
That would be nice! But at least this method merges the entire history in one go it seems. What would our process of feedback be in that case? I'm worried about just merging the whole thing in and everyone just being like "yeah looks good 👍" without anyone else actually understanding how the code works... |
you could create a new feature branch on the xarray repo (just to be safe) and put the datatree code in a "staging" area. Then copying over the modules one by one might work? Not sure if that breaks Edit: the merge of that feature branch into |
Thanks for putting this together @TomNicholas Happy to help out with this however I can. Like I mentioned in the meeting last week, I'm not super familiar with the xarray backend but definitely willing to learn. |
I was taking a quick look at this. Are you essentially saying we just need to copy the contents of datatree/io.py into xarray/backends/api.py (plus necessary tests to equivalent places)? Or do some of the things in |
There are 3 levels of integration at which we could do this:
I think you should try (2), falling back to (1) if that's too tricky, but deliberately leave (3) for a later PR. |
Hello, If it can help, I found myself in a situation, quite similar however slightly different, where I had to merge two repos A and B into one (keeping A and archiving B), moving contents of A and B into new subfolders of the A repo, eg Here is a gist summarizing my procedure to do so: https://gist.github.com/eschalkargans/318d83e58d63d83454d1f8a497786a8d |
I tried my hand at doing the merge, here's the result: If anyone wants to try, after adding git merge datatree/prepare-for-migration --no-commit --allow-unrelated-histories where |
So I wasn't able to come up with anything more clever1 than what is above. If bringing the history over in one go to a temporary location is fine, I presume renaming the files into locations as we migrate will preserve the history as we move forward. I guess the next question is whether to feature branch after the import and merge to main or to try to do the migration steps into main proper? Pros and cons to both, but would lean towards directly into main. Thoughts/feelings?
|
Thanks all three of you for trying this!
Is it just me or has this approach not actually preserved the history at all? All the datatree code seems to be squashed into one massive commit: keewis@4227b38
I think we don't really need a feature branch as there are no backwards compatibility issues? (@shoyer unless you have a preference?) Also the datatree code can be merged into main without actually exposing @eschalkargans we appreciate your interest in this! FYI the rest of us on this thread met yesterday in xarray's bi-weekly community dev call, which you would be more than welcome to join for. 😄 Regardless we will try to write out any decisions we make in that meeting also on github for reference. |
no, that's just the commit for importing the Edit: I don't have any preferences about feature branch vs. merging directly into |
That might be just minor, but the PR links are pointing now to the xarray repo unrelated PR's. Not sure we can do anything about. Could these links (eg. #50) be stripped or relocated to datatree repo during the process to avoid any issues? |
We could rewrite the commit message history, using a tool like git-filter-repo, to explicitly repoint e.g. |
@slevang Great this works. Could we also change comments in code (where maybe issues) are linked the same way? |
Yep, there is a |
steps to prepare datatree for xarray import
I think if you take these steps before running the @keewis import steps, you might be ready to go. |
Also, I added steps 6. and 7. to make sure they worked as I expected
So my fork is (close to) what I would expect xarray to look like after we merge the repositories. And I can start work on the first code task A set of questions: |
I can't think of a sensible way to keep these in sync. Archiving Looks like we could move open issues, of which there are currently 57, with something like this. Moving PRs seems much harder because every PR would have to be rebased onto the |
@flamingbear @slevang this is excellent!
To download? The whole time, so that people can use it. Under active development? I don't think it really needs to be.
I'm not sure it's hugely important to. The rate of development on datatree has slowed to a crawl (which is why I think it's mature enough to start moving it - people seem pretty happy to use it as is).
I would be happy to put some kind of disclaimer on the datatree readme saying that whilst we accept new PRs the repo will be deprecated and any PRs since [date we begin merging into xarray] might be later copied across to xarray without full git attribution.
Open issues are important to retain ideally, as are closed issues (they document the design process, and I tried hard to write that down in public). Open PRs I'm not so bothered about. Once you rule out the open PRs that are either (a) me, (b) stale, (c) trivial, there are only like 2 or 3 left, which can be handled manually. Other opinions welcome, but I would suggest that we just release a new version of datatree (as it's overdue), and once we've done that we can put a disclaimer on the repo? |
I've merged a couple of things, released v0.0.14, and added a migration notice to datatree's readme. |
Excellent. I will start steps 1-7 again with the latest xarray and datatree. |
There's the PR for the import #8656 |
Is there a tool you all use to test CI locally? I force pushed myself into a hole and would like to avoid that moving forward. |
@TomNicholas One more thing to add to our MVP list is to migrate all of the issues in DataTree over to xarray. |
…nt, and H5netcdfBackendEntrypoint (#9243) - [x] Closes #9137 and in support of #8572 - [x] Tests added - [x] User visible changes (including notable bug fixes) are documented in `whats-new.rst` - [ ] New functions/methods are listed in `api.rst` Co-authored-by: pre-commit-ci[bot] <66853113+pre-commit-ci[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Deepak Cherian <[email protected]>
Release ToDos for myself:
cc @keewis |
Released! 🍾 Thank you so much everyone - anything else that comes up can go in a new issue. (closed by https://github.com/pydata/xarray/releases/tag/v2024.10.0 and #9680) |
What is your issue?
Master issue to track progress of merging xarray-datatree into xarray
main
. Would close #4118 (and many similar issues), as well as one of the goals of our development roadmap.Also see the project board for DataTree integration.
On calls in the last few dev meetings, we decided to forget about a temporary cross-repo
from xarray import datatree
(so this issue supercedes #7418), and just begin merging datatree into xarray main directly.Weekly meeting
See #8747
Task list:
To happen in order:
open_datatree
in xarray. This doesn't need to be performant initially, andit would initially return aEDIT: We decided it should return andatatree.DataTree
object.xarray.DataTree
object, or evenxarray.core.datatree.DataTree
object. So we can start by just copying the basic version indatatree/io.py
right now which just callsopen_dataset
many times. add open_datatree to xarray #8697Triage and fix issues: figure out which of the issues on xarray-contrib/datatree need to be fixed before the merge (if any).
Merge in code for
DataTree
class. I suggest we do this by making one PR for each module, and ideally discussing and merging each before opening a PR for the next module. (Open to other workflow suggestions though.) The main aim here being lowering the bus factor on the code, confirming high-level design decisions, and improving details of the implementation as it goes in.Suggested order of modules to merge:
datatree/treenode.py
- defines the tree structure, without any dimensions/data attached, Migrate treenode module. #8757datatree/datatree.py
- adds data to the tree structure, Migrate datatree.py module into xarray.core. #8789datatree/iterators.py
- iterates over a single tree in various ways, currently copied from anytree, Migrate iterators.py for datatree. #8879datatree/mapping.py
- implementsmap_over_subtree
by iterating over N trees at once Migrate datatree mapping.py #8948,datatree/ops.py
- usesmap_over_subtree
to map methods like.mean
over whole trees (Migration of datatree/ops.py -> datatree_ops.py #8976),datatree/formatting_html.py
- HTML repr, works but could do with some optimization Migrate formatting_html.py into xarray core #8930,datatree/{extensions/common}.py
- miscellaneous other features e.g. attribute-like access (Migrate datatreee assertions/extensions/formatting #8967).Expose datatree API publicly. Actually expose
open_datatree
andDataTree
in xarray's public API as top-level imports. The full list of things to expose is:open_datatree
DataTree
map_over_subtree
assert_isomorphic
register_datatree_accessor
Refactor class inheritance -
Dataset
/DataArray
share some mixin classes (e.g.DataWithCoords
), and we could probably refactorDataTree
to use these too. This is low-priority but would reduce code duplication.Can happen basically at any time or maybe in parallel with other efforts:
xr.open_datatree
exists, we can start refactoring xarray's backend classes to support a generalBackend.open_datatree
method for any backend that can open multiple groups. Then we can make sure this is more performant than the naive implementation, i.e. only opening the file once. See also Improving performance of open_datatree #8994.open_datatree
in BackendEntrypoint for preliminary DataTree support #7437,.reorder_nodes
and ideas we've only discussed like API for filtering / subsetting xarray-contrib/datatree#79 and Tree-aware dataset handling/selection xarray-contrib/datatree#254 (cc @dcherian who has had useful ideas here)datatree
repositoryxarray.tutorial.open_datatree
- I've been meaning to make a tutorial datatree object for ages. There's an issue about it, but actually now I think something close to the CMIP6 ensemble data that @jbusecke and I used in our pangeo blog post would already be pretty good. Once we have this it becomes much easier to write docs about some advanced features.Anyone is welcome to help with any of this, including but not limited to @owenlittlejohns , @eni-awowale, @flamingbear (@etienneschalk maybe?).
cc also @shoyer @keewis for any thoughts as to the process.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: