On 28 May 2013 10:31, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > We tried at some point in the past to set up guidelines and rules for > apps but it was not very successful. App developers want complete > control of their code, coding practices etc which I think is fine. >
As long as the app is using parts of FEniCS of course... what about license requirements? > So my suggestion would be to keep it as loose as possible: We list the > apps with an image, a short text and a link on the FEniCS web page - > that makes the apps "officially sanctioned". Other than that, the apps > can put their code wherever they want. I'd welcome any effort to > organize the apps on Bitbucket but I suspect anyone who tries it will > have a hard time tracking down all the app developers and moving them > over to Bitbucket. > We don't necessarily have to move all developers if we keep the links to individual app pages on http://fenicsproject.org/applications/. As development of FEniCS Plasticity is discontinued on Launchpad, I would be happy to stick it under some common fenics-apps repo/project on Bitbucket if possible while maintaining admin control of the Plasticity repository. Kristian > -- > Anders > > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 10:07:12AM +0200, Joachim Berdal Haga 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 [1]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. > > -j. > > > > On 28 May 2013 09:55, Garth N. Wells <[2][email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 28 May 2013 08:35, Joachim Berdal Haga <[3][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 <[4][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 <[5][email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> On 23 May 2013 12:07, Joachim Berdal Haga <[6][email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> > Yes. I suggest that whatever is listed on > > >>> > [7]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 > > >>> > [8]fenicsproject.org/applications/ interested? > > >>> > > > >>> > -j. > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On 23 May 2013 12:30, Garth N. Wells <[9][email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> >> > > >>> >> On 23 May 2013 11:10, Joachim Berdal Haga <[10][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 <[11][email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> On 20 May 2013 21:33, Anders Logg <[12][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 > > >>> >> >> > ([13]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 > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Referenser > > > > 1. http://fenicsproject.org/ > > 2. mailto:[email protected] > > 3. mailto:[email protected] > > 4. mailto:[email protected] > > 5. mailto:[email protected] > > 6. mailto:[email protected] > > 7. http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ > > 8. http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ > > 9. mailto:[email protected] > > 10. mailto:[email protected] > > 11. mailto:[email protected] > > 12. mailto:[email protected] > > 13. https://bitbucket.org/fenics-apps > > 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
