I think all of the FEniCS-questions that were closed on scicomp were
programming-related questions ("How do I do X in fenics?"), all of the
questions that were considered a good fit actually didn't deserve the tag
"fenics" as they were very general ("What's a good numerical procedure to
do X?").
Abandoning scicomp altogether would thus make sense for FEniCS (as in:
related to the software FEniCS), while the individual user may still get
their numerical analysis questions answered there (maybe even by FEniCS
devs).Anyhow. While I think that any question on fenics.stackexchange would either fit into stackoverflow or scicomp, I'd look at fenics.stackexchange too. --Nico On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > Moving FEniCS-related programming questions to stackoverflow would > make the situation even worse by adding yet another option for our > users. And we would still need to worry that our users misbehave in > the eyes of the moderators. > > -- > Anders > > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 12:59:18PM +0200, Nico Schlömer wrote: > > There's a discussion on > > [1]http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/38040/matlab > > [2] > http://discuss.area51.stackexchange.com/questions/4363/why-does-matl > > ab-need-a-separate-site > > about moving MATLAB(r) questions from stackoverflow over to its own > > stackexchange site. > > They never did that though since they weren'y able to gain 200 > > committed developers, 100 of which with a notable score on another > > stackexchange site. I suspect this will be a though call for FEniCS as > > well. > > An option would be to move the questions concerned with programming > > FEniCS (like "how do I set boundary conditions in discontinuous > > Galerkin?") over to stackoverflow, and leave the more substantial > > questions on scicomp (like "what's a good navier-stokes solver?"). I > > think we could make clear the difference to users. > > --Nico > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Garth N. Wells <[3][email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > On 4 June 2013 07:48, Anders Logg <[4][email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I think it is apparent that scicomp.stackexchange is not a good > place > > > for hosting FEniCS user questions. The reasons are many: the > > moderators > > > (and likely also a large group of users) think that a large fraction > > > of the FEniCS questions posted are inappropriate (too > > FEniCS-specific) > > > and our users have a hard time knowing which forum to post in > (either > > > scicomp.stackexchange or one of two mailing lists). As an example, > > > here is a question I think is very legitimate (for FEniCS), which > was > > > very quickly closed by the moderators: > > > > > > > > [5] > http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/7503/discontinuous-galerk > > in-and-boundary-conditions > > > > > > So we need to find another forum where all FEniCS questions and > users > > > are welcome. > > > > > > > I agree that [6]http://scicomp.stackexchange.com is not suited to > > our > > purpose, and it's unclear what should or shouldn't be posted there. > > > > > Which are our options? I really don't want to move back to a mailing > > > list. Ideally, we would need a platform like stackexchange. > > > > > > > Agree. > > > > > Can we handle a fenics.stackexchange site? That would require a firm > > > commitment from our group of core developers to actively work to > grow > > > and maintain a strong presence on the new site, as there are certain > > > requirements on volume for setting up a stackexchange site: > > > > > > > I suspect that we can, if we get a significant commitment from core > > developers and experienced users to (a) answer questions and (b) set > > the tone by posing good questions, especially at the start. > > > > > [7]http://area51.stackexchange.com/ > > > > > > Some more references: > > > > > > > > [8] > http://meta.scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/368/what-concrete-gu > > idance-should-we-give-to-people-asking-software-package-specific > > > > > > > > [9] > http://meta.scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/353/thoughts-comment > > s-and-reactions-about-the-fenics-experiment > > > > > > > > [10] > http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/28815/computational-scien > > ce > > > > > > Are there other alternatives to stackexchange? > > > > > > > I'm not aware of any hosted alternatives. I have a very strong > > preferences for a hosted service over running our own system on > > [11]fenicsproject.org. > > Garth > > > > _______________________________________________ > > fenics mailing list > > [14][email protected] > > [15]http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics > > > > Referenser > > > > 1. http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/38040/matlab > > 2. > http://discuss.area51.stackexchange.com/questions/4363/why-does-matlab-need-a-separate-site > > 3. mailto:[email protected] > > 4. mailto:[email protected] > > 5. > http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/7503/discontinuous-galerkin-and-boundary-conditions > > 6. http://scicomp.stackexchange.com/ > > 7. http://area51.stackexchange.com/ > > 8. > http://meta.scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/368/what-concrete-guidance-should-we-give-to-people-asking-software-package-specific > > 9. > http://meta.scicomp.stackexchange.com/questions/353/thoughts-comments-and-reactions-about-the-fenics-experiment > > 10. > http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/28815/computational-science > > 11. http://fenicsproject.org/ > > 12. mailto:[email protected] > > 13. http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics > > 14. mailto:[email protected] > > 15. 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
