On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 01:36:38AM -0800, Steven Haddock wrote: > Exactly! thus a ~/scripts folder in your PATH and under version > control… This is really the most real-world solution.
I don't see much benefit to going into executable permissions and shebangs if you're trying to facilitate single-user data processing. Having an project under version control with notes, scripts, a root Makfile, etc. sounds like a reasonable approach, and then you can use: python ./bin/script.py etc. in the Makefile. To your earlier point about shebang not being much trouble [1], I expect it to be more trouble to explain than PATH, permissions, and shebangs than to explain ‘$INTERPRETER $SCRIPT’. And this is going to be such a peripheral part of your goal (reproducible science) that I wouldn't do more than drop a reference [2]. But knowing about PATH, permissions, and shebangs are certainly useful for folks who spend a lot of time on POSIX systems. Whether it's worth the time to cover in a science-focused course probably depends on what else is competing for that time ;). Cheers, Trevor [1]: http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org/2016-March/004054.html Subject: Re: [Discuss] From scripts to executable scripts Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 23:21:53 -0800 Message-Id: <[email protected]> [2]: http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org/2016-March/004052.html Subject: Re: [Discuss] From scripts to executable scripts Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 22:53:13 -0800 Message-ID: <[email protected]> -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
