AtomsBase v0.4 support #176
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
curious about the failing tests on macos |
|
but looks fine. happy to merge if you say it is ready. |
|
It is ready for merge. Those macOS test fails seem to be python related and can probably solved by restring versions somehow. So, I would not worry about them. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds support for AtomsBase v0.4 and drops from v0.3.
The only support is only to convert to
JuLIP.Atomsstructure from AtomsBaseAbstractSystemand vise versa toFlexibleSystem.The main reason for this to update ACEmd to AtomsBase v0.4. That may help up getting ACEpotentials transitioned to a new version nicely. Also, it helps me to find out some possible bugs in elsewhere in the ecosystem.