George Shapovalov wrote: > So, right now I would like to ask for the feedback on the following: > > Q1) I would like to hear about the reasons why people are afraid to join the > sci team. You may respond to me personally or raise it on the list, but > please let me/us know about the problems in any case, so that we may address > them! > Not so much afraid as spread too thin between my day job and hobby computing. I just wouldn't be able to fill a role beyond tester without giving up something else I really love to do. :) > Q2) Please let me know if you are supporting or occasionally touching some > package under sci-* and, assuming we create more herds, which herd it should > belong to (just make it up as you see fit right now) and whether you would be > willing to add yourself to the alias of that herd or join some subteam if we > create one. I will collect the responces and then compile a proposal for the > new structure. > I have some ideas for breaking up the larger chunks. For example, "sci-mathematics" could be broken into symbolic and numeric, the latter picking up "blas-atlas" and "lapack-atlas". I'd move everything from sci-libs into its functional area ... blas-atlas and lapack-atlas to math/numeric, , the graphics libraries to sci-visualization, etc. > Q3) Not relevant to this restructuring, but always usefull: if you know of > some package that you think should really go under sci-something, please let > us know! > Everything I use actively is there already, plus a lot of stuff I have no interest in. There are a couple of Markov modeling packages I'd like to see that are in pretty good shape -- PRISM from http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~dxp/prism/ and PEPA Workbench from ttp://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/s9905941/jPEPA/. Neil Gunther's "PDQ" (http://www.perfdynamics.com/Tools/PDQcode.html) would be a nice addition. A good open-source discrete event simulator would be nice. The most popular seems to be C++SIM (http://cxxsim.ncl.ac.uk/) > And to finish it all up :) > Q4) If you are a user but would like to be involved more actively, or you > have > to run that particular package for your work but it sits in bugzilla for ages > and no developer seems sensible enough to take it up, please let us know too. > Yeah, but see Q1 :).
-- M. Edward (Ed) Borasky http://linuxcapacityplanning.com -- [email protected] mailing list
