On 23 May 2013 13:07, Joachim Berdal Haga <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes. I suggest that whatever is listed on > http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ is sanctioned. Which just moves > the problem elsewhere, but that problem already exists. > > Does anybody else have an opinion on whether 'fenics-apps' should exist as > a team? In particular, are any of the other projects listed at > fenicsproject.org/applications/ interested? >
Eventually, FEniCS plasticity will move to fenics-apps on Bitbucket (the dev version is currently at https://bitbucket.org/garth.wells/fenics-plasticity). I'm not sure whether or not we should have one fenics-apps team or multiple teams, I think whichever imposes the least restrictions on application developers. Kristian > -j. > > > On 23 May 2013 12:30, Garth N. Wells <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 23 May 2013 11:10, Joachim Berdal Haga <[email protected]> wrote: >> > True, but I don't see it as significant. The repo can contain multiple >> > development/release/topic branches, and if this isn't sufficient then >> > multiple repos can be created by the team administrators. >> > >> >> Just something to weigh up. The key question is whether having 'team' >> is better than individual project teams. For example, maybe the CBC >> collection is better as it's own team with a collection of >> projects/repos rather than as a bunch of repos in a apps team. >> >> If there is one apps team and it's 'sanctioned', there needs to be a >> policy on how a project qualifies, and under what circumstances it >> should be removed. >> >> Garth >> >> >> > (Later, after looking into team access administration:) I see now that >> repo >> > creation is a separate acl, so it is possible to give creation rights to >> > projects without giving full administrative access. >> > >> > -j >> > >> > >> > On 23 May 2013 11:31, Garth N. Wells <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 20 May 2013 21:33, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 08:13:44PM +0200, Joachim Berdal Haga wrote: >> >> >> I'm about to move cbc.block (which is listed as a fenics >> >> >> application) >> >> >> from launchpad to bitbucket. I think it would be nice if the >> >> >> repository >> >> >> could be in a "fenics-apps" team - like the "fenics-group" >> project >> >> >> on >> >> >> launchpad. It makes the fenics applications more discoverable, >> and >> >> >> the >> >> >> urls more descriptive. >> >> >> I can of course create this team myself since the name isn't >> taken, >> >> >> but >> >> >> I'd prefer it to be decided by somebody more in the loop than >> I... >> >> > >> >> > I think having a fenics-apps team (https://bitbucket.org/fenics-apps >> ) >> >> > would be a good idea. And same as last time, I'd prefer if someone >> >> > else took charge of it. Previously, Andy and Kristian did this on >> >> > Launchpad. >> >> > >> >> > So if you volunteer, just go ahead and create the team, but lets wait >> >> > to get some more comments, especially from Andy and Kristian. >> >> > >> >> >> >> There are some drawbacks to this. An 'apps' project won't have full >> >> control, e.g. will not be able to create multiple repos. On Launchpad, >> >> fenics-apps was an umbrella rather than a team. >> >> >> >> Garth >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- >> >> > Anders >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > fenics mailing list >> >> > [email protected] >> >> > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics >> > >> > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > fenics mailing list > [email protected] > http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics > >
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
