On 28 May 2013 10:49, Kristian Ølgaard <[email protected]> wrote: > On 28 May 2013 11:19, Joachim Berdal Haga <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It's there now, on https://bitbucket.org/fenics-apps. Depending on >> preferences, it may be better to transfer repo ownership rather than >> forking, to avoid (or reverse) the "fork of ..." status. Anyway, have a look >> and let me know how it goes. > > > It looks OK to me. At least it is how I imagined it to be and I don't see a > reason why it shouldn't work. > Transferring ownership is probably better/cleaner than forking, Garth? >
I don't think forking is good. Garth > Kristian > > >> >> >> >> On 28 May 2013 11:10, Kristian Ølgaard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 28 May 2013 10:55, Joachim Berdal Haga <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 28 May 2013 10:42, Kristian Ølgaard <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 28 May 2013 10:31, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> 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/. >>>> >>>> >>>> Indeed. >>> >>> >>> I think we should change the introduction text on >>> http://fenicsproject.org/applications/ to make it the central page for >>> FEniCS Applications. >>> We could also point people to Launchpad and Bitbucket as the two main >>> resources for code. >>> We should probably also list any requirements that we will not deviate >>> from when considering a new apps project, apart from that, new candidates >>> will be discussed on the mailing list. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> How about an experiment. I'll create fenics-apps and fork >>>> FEniCS-Plasticity into it, and give you admin rights to the fork. Then you >>>> can have a look to see if it's good enough. We'll just delete it afterwards >>>> if it isn't. >>>> >>> >>> That's a plan. We will most likely change the name anyway but let's try >>> it out. >>> >>> Kristian >>> >>>> >>>> -j. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 28 May 2013 10:42, Kristian Ølgaard <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 > _______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
