Skip to content
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

Prepare 0.24.0 release #10063

Merged
merged 19 commits into from
May 4, 2023
Merged

Prepare 0.24.0 release #10063

merged 19 commits into from
May 4, 2023

Conversation

mtreinish
Copy link
Member

@mtreinish mtreinish commented May 2, 2023

Summary

This commit prepares the 0.24.0 release, this involves 2 steps first changing all the version numbers to 0.24.0 from 0.24.0rc1 and secondly updating the release notes to prepare them for publishing.

For the release notes this release leverages a pre-release feature in reno to add subsections to the release notes. For this first release leveraging this feature subsections are added to the features, deprecations, and upgrade sections for transpiler, algorithms, circuits, quantum_info, pulse, providers, primitives, and visualization. This lets us group notes into these subcategories. In future releases we can look at adding deeper hierarchy if needed.

Details and comments

TODO:

  • Finish categorizing and updating release notes

@mtreinish mtreinish added on hold Can not fix yet Changelog: None Do not include in changelog labels May 2, 2023
@mtreinish mtreinish added this to the 0.24.0 milestone May 2, 2023
@qiskit-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you for opening a new pull request.

Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient.

While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone.

One or more of the the following people are requested to review this:

@mtreinish mtreinish force-pushed the prep-0.24 branch 2 times, most recently from b3f905c to e2a836d Compare May 3, 2023 19:02
@mtreinish mtreinish removed the on hold Can not fix yet label May 3, 2023
@mtreinish mtreinish marked this pull request as ready for review May 3, 2023 19:39
@mtreinish mtreinish requested a review from a team as a code owner May 3, 2023 19:39
mtreinish and others added 12 commits May 4, 2023 06:37
This commit prepares the 0.24.0 release, this involves 2 steps first
changing all the version numbers to 0.24.0 from 0.24.0rc1 and secondly
updating the release notes to prepare them for publishing.

For the release notes this release leverages a pre-release feature in
reno to add subsections to the release notes. For this first release
leveraging this feature subsections are added to the features,
deprecations, and upgrade sections for transpiler, algorithms, circuits,
quantum_info, pulse, providers, primitives, and visualization. This lets
us group notes into these subcategories. In future reelases we can look
at adding deeper heirarchy if needed.
…57f7cf15b0b.yaml

Co-authored-by: Luciano Bello <bel@zurich.ibm.com>
Copy link
Member

@kdk kdk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Made it through the bottom ~40 files (up to releasenotes/notes/0.24/new-deprecation-utilities-066aff05e221d7b1.yaml). Looks good so far.

Co-authored-by: Kevin Krsulich <kevin@krsulich.net>
…aba736.yaml

Co-authored-by: John Lapeyre <jlapeyre@users.noreply.github.com>
- |
Add the parameter `var_order` when defining a `PhaseOracle`. This allows for defining the order in which the variables in the logical expression are being considered.
Added a new argument, ``var_order``, to the :class:`~.PhaseOracle` class's constructor to
enable setting the order in which the variables in the logical expression are being
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If I understand, I think this should be "are being" -> "are to be" ?

Co-authored-by: Julien Gacon <gaconju@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: John Lapeyre <jlapeyre@users.noreply.github.com>
mtreinish and others added 2 commits May 4, 2023 12:08
Co-authored-by: John Lapeyre <jlapeyre@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Kevin Krsulich <kevin@krsulich.net>
Copy link
Member

@kdk kdk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks for the updates!

@mtreinish mtreinish merged commit a259fd8 into Qiskit:stable/0.24 May 4, 2023
@mtreinish mtreinish deleted the prep-0.24 branch May 4, 2023 18:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Changelog: None Do not include in changelog
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants