Changing the default branch of Zarr-Python

[sanketverma1704]

Considering the PRs opened by @grlee77 to add V3 in Zarr-Python, I and @joshmoore propose that we review and merge the PRs by @grlee78 into main and change the default branch to v2-main or something similar.

This will allow us to:

• Move towards the development of stable V3
• All the new PRs by the community and users will be opened into main which would have V3 features added by @grlee77. This would help us find any bugs/issues and fix them.

Thoughts?

Cc: @jakirkham @alimanfoo @rabernat @ryan-williams

[sanketverma1704]

Update: @grlee78's PR has passed all the checks and is ready for reviewing and merging.

[joshmoore]

change the default branch to v2-main or something similar.

I'd like to clarify that in mind this sentence is "change the current default branch (i.e.master) to v2-something".

Basically, there are three calls for objections (and/or requests for alternatives):

1. Objections to renaming master to main on zarr-python per Switch master branches to main community#44?
2. Objections to creating separate "stable" and "dev" branches? (Naming to be worked out)
3. Objections to making the "dev" branch the default in order to drive the v3 work?

[joshmoore]

Feedback from today's call:

• There's no real concern with getting Implement Zarr V3 protocol zarr-python#898 merged.
• The driving issue here is that the stability of v3 is a bit in question due to Add Sharding v1.0 Spec & Storage Transformers to Zarr v3.0 zarr-specs#134.
• However, there is some concern about the overhead of maintaining two branches.
• @jbms suggests the alternative of a feature toggle (e.g. by preventing the import of the v3 classes unless a variable is set)

Thoughts still welcome. 898 at least is unblocked, and a decision on this issue will only need to be made when the time for 2.11.2 comes.

[jakirkham]

Sorry for missing the call. Was out sick most of the week.

Sounds like the branch versioning issue is less pressing.

In case there is still a need for branch versioning, would suggest we consider an approach where the non-latest major version branch is broken out (v2) and main points to the latest major version.

[sanketverma1704]

Is it safe to close this issue?