On 28 May 2013 10:49, Joachim Berdal Haga <[email protected]> wrote: > On 28 May 2013 10:35, Kristian Ølgaard <[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 > 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 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 28 May 2013 10:07, Joachim Berdal Haga <[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 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 >> 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 <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 28 May 2013 08:35, Joachim Berdal Haga <[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 >>>> >>>> >>>> > -- >>>> > Joachim. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On 23 May 2013 13:46, Joachim Berdal Haga <[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 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On 23 May 2013 12:07, 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. >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> >>>> >>> 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 >>>> >>> > fenicsproject.org/applications/ interested? >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > -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
