Release 0.21.4 - bugfix release #590
Conversation
|
Note for conda-forge release: |
|
@jchodera once you get a chance to look at this I'll get it on conda-forge |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apologies for requesting changes, but it's helpful to see if we can write really clear release notes!
It seems like this process of crafting release notes only at release time makes it hard for the person writing the release notes to actually write useful and informative release notes, since they didn't necessarily write the PRs. I wonder if we should change our practice and go back to having the person submitting the PR write clear and comprehensible release notes explaining what that PR changes. Presumably, the person who is contributing the PR should be able to succinctly explain what it does---we're having a hard time with this using the current approach.
docs/releasehistory.rst
Outdated
| @@ -8,6 +8,12 @@ Bugfixes | |||
| -------- | |||
| - Bug in statistical inefficiency computation -- where self.max_n_iterations wasn't being used -- was fixed (`#577 <https://github.com/choderalab/openmmtools/pull/577>`_). | |||
| - Bug in estimated performance in realtime yaml file -- fixed by iterating through all MCMC moves (`#578 <https://github.com/choderalab/openmmtools/pull/578>`_) | |||
| - Explicit update and broadcast of thermodynamic states when running equilibration. Issue `#579 <https://github.com/choderalab/openmmtools/issues/579>`_ (`#587 <https://github.com/choderalab/openmmtools/pull/587>`_). | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one-sentence description doesn't explain to the user what bug this would have caused, which is what all the other descriptions do. Can you be more explicit about what problematic behavior was corrected?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For example, is the correct explanation "Bug in equilibration not doing anything when running with MPI -- fixed by explicitly broadcasting thermodynamics states after equilibration"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn't really solve a bug, since the equilibrate() function is not really called inside an MPI Context. In my opinion this is just for "completeness" to match the changes made to _mix_replicas() in #562 (this one did fix the bug with mixing replicas in an MPI context).
docs/releasehistory.rst
Outdated
|
|
||
| Enhancements | ||
| ------------ | ||
| - Eliminate parmed dependency from ``DHFRExplicit``. Issue `#539 <https://github.com/choderalab/openmmtools/issues/539>`_ (`#588 <https://github.com/choderalab/openmmtools/pull/588>`_). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you explain why this is an enhancement or is desirable in this description?
For example, "Eliminate parmed dependency---which was an optional dependency of openmmtools---from DHFRExplicit".
|
@jchodera I updated the descriptions of the changes. Can you take another look? Thanks! |
Description
Preparing release 0.21.4.
Detailed information in the release history file.
Status