>From my side, I support whatever you (Joachim + Kristian) decide to do with the organization of apps.
-- Anders On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:55:12AM +0200, Kristian Ølgaard wrote: > On 28 May 2013 10:49, Joachim Berdal Haga <[1][email protected]> wrote: > > On 28 May 2013 10:35, Kristian > Ølgaard <[2][email protected]> wrote: > > increases the visibility. So I think that adding fenics-apps to > Bitbucket would essentially be a common starting point for obtaining > the code for the individual apps projects. It is then up to the > developers to organise their own project pages. How to do this on > Bitbucket, to allow teams of devs to manage subprojects, is the only > issue as I see it. > > The "technical" side of things should work out fine, I think. The > administrators (whoever: me, or you, or a team; I'm not fussed) will > have to create the repo for each project. But the application project > will have full administrative rights to the repo from there on, to set > up access rights (along with wiki, bug tracker etc). I think it is also > possible to set up a repo redirect, if anyone wants to have a presence > on [3]bitbucket.org/fenics-apps but has code elsewhere. This is all > voluntary and initiated by the app author, of course. > > Why not simply give it a go then, unless anyone strongly objects? If > you start with cbc.block, then we try adding FEniCS Plasticity later. > Kristian > > -j. > On 28 May 2013 10:35, Kristian Ølgaard <[4][email protected]> > wrote: > > On 28 May 2013 10:07, Joachim Berdal Haga <[5][email protected]> wrote: > > I'll kick off: The value of fenics-apps in general is in the increased > visibility of these projects, and in return in "adding value" to fenics > by increasing its scope. But the value of any specific mechanism > whereby the apps are grouped or blessed - on [6]fenicsproject.org, on > launchpad or bitbucket, in the book - is more fluid. In my opinion, > each of these has a potential audience and are worthwhile > > I agree with Joachim on the above. I see the apps as complex demos of > what can be solved within the FEniCS framework and this is what the > apps does for the community. In return, the apps are listed on > [7]http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ which increases the > visibility. So I think that adding fenics-apps to Bitbucket would > essentially be a common starting point for obtaining the code for the > individual apps projects. It is then up to the developers to organise > their own project pages. How to do this on Bitbucket, to allow teams of > devs to manage subprojects, is the only issue as I see it. > In the old mediawiki days, I believe the only requirements for a > project to be considered a candidate for FEniCS-Apps was that it used > at least one of the core components and that the license was compatible > with that of the relevant FEniCS component(s). > Kristian > > -j. > > On 28 May 2013 09:55, Garth N. Wells <[8][email protected]> wrote: > > On 28 May 2013 08:35, Joachim Berdal Haga <[9][email protected]> wrote: > > I think with the limited interest and disagreements about procedure, > I'll > > shelve this idea for now. > > > > I wouldn't say disagreements - it's a different system so the pros > and > cons needed to be assessed to make an informed decision. It's also > an > opportunity to reflect on what with the 'apps' has worked well, and > what perhaps hasn't worked well. I think it's a discussion still > worth > having. > Garth > > > > > > > On 23 May 2013 13:46, Joachim Berdal Haga <[10][email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Why, it seems like a perfectly sensible policy to me. The projects > listed > >> on that page are under the fenics applications umbrella, and hence > permitted > >> to have repos in the fenics-apps team. The projects that do not want > to be > >> hosted within fenics-apps are not going to be forced into it, of > course! > >> > >> -j. > >> > >> > >> On 23 May 2013 13:20, Garth N. Wells <[11][email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 23 May 2013 12:07, Joachim Berdal Haga <[12][email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > Yes. I suggest that whatever is listed on > >>> > [13]http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ is sanctioned. Which > just moves > >>> > the > >>> > problem elsewhere, but that problem already exists. > >>> > > >>> > >>> That's not a policy. > >>> > >>> Not all those projects will want to be hosted within a fenics-apps > >>> team. What will their status be? > >>> > >>> Garth > >>> > >>> > 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 > >>> > [14]fenicsproject.org/applications/ interested? > >>> > > >>> > -j. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > On 23 May 2013 12:30, Garth N. Wells <[15][email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> On 23 May 2013 11:10, Joachim Berdal Haga <[16][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 <[17][email protected]> > wrote: > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> On 20 May 2013 21:33, Anders Logg <[18][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 > >>> >> >> > ([19]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 > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > fenics mailing list > [22][email protected] > [23]http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics > > Referenser > > 1. mailto:[email protected] > 2. mailto:[email protected] > 3. http://bitbucket.org/fenics-apps > 4. mailto:[email protected] > 5. mailto:[email protected] > 6. http://fenicsproject.org/ > 7. http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ > 8. mailto:[email protected] > 9. mailto:[email protected] > 10. mailto:[email protected] > 11. mailto:[email protected] > 12. mailto:[email protected] > 13. http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ > 14. http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ > 15. mailto:[email protected] > 16. mailto:[email protected] > 17. mailto:[email protected] > 18. mailto:[email protected] > 19. https://bitbucket.org/fenics-apps > 20. mailto:[email protected] > 21. http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics > 22. mailto:[email protected] > 23. 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
