Registering a julia-0.7 compatible package

General Usage
1

Hello,

Thanks to the work of several others, some of the packages I maintain are now ready for julia-0.7. But I am somewhat confused how to register these with METADATA. The old PkgDev appears not to work in 0.7, and the new Pkg system doesn’t seem to have registration functionality, at least, I can’t seem to be able to find anything about it in the Pkg docs.

Cheers,

—david

1 Like
2

You can just keep using AttoBot and GitHub releases and they should continue to just work. See also: How am I supposed to create and distribute packages in Julia 0.7/1.0 ? - #2 by rdeits

3

Hello, thank you.

“You can just keep doing exactly what you were doing before” doesn’t work for me, as PkgDev is broken (at least for me) in julia-0.7.

Cheers,

4

Good point. PkgDev just creates the default src and test folders and a few files like the blank Readme and the License. You should be able to copy those over from any other Julia package or just create them manually. Not super convenient, but it’s only necessary until WIP: Upgrade PkgDev to a new 1.0 era by KristofferC · Pull Request #144 · JuliaLang/PkgDev.jl · GitHub is merged.

5

The currently broken PkdDev provided me with PkgDev.tag() and PkgDev.publish(), which was exactly what I was doing before. Hence my question towards what exactly I should be doing now, in order to get updated versions of my package registered.

6

I think that using AttoBot (https://github.com/attobot/attobot) and the GitHub webpage (as explained in attobot’s README.md) is the recommended way to tag and publish packages now.

2 Likes
7

Thanks, that was the missing bit of information. I was not aware of attobot.

8

Agree with @davidavdav that it would be really nice for the Julia docs to go through the package release workflow (including details about attobot, if that’s the suggested method). I also have been using PkgDev.tag and PkgDev.publish and spent about an hour this morning trying to figure out how to do this in 0.7+ (and whether the suggested workflow was just to use raw git commands from a terminal).