Re: [cellml-discussion] Concerning the CellML Model Repository

2007-06-26 Thread Tommy Yu
David Nickerson wrote: Hi Tommy, That looks good - its all starting to make sense to me now. I'm just wondering how your system would handle a case where two authors independently encode the same published model. The first author to upload their encoding would get ownership of the

Re: [cellml-discussion] Concerning the CellML Model Repository

2007-06-26 Thread Matt
I don't understand the purpose of this. It looks like you are inventing a versioning system to implement from scratch. I don't see how this system would work with someone working on a filesystem and not wanting to use a browser - you'd have to invent client software for this. Start by reviewing

Re: [cellml-discussion] Concerning the CellML Model Repository

2007-06-26 Thread Tommy Yu
Matt wrote: I don't understand the purpose of this. It looks like you are inventing a versioning system to implement from scratch. That's what it looks like, but if you recall the software choices I have written down I have been considering them, and have been going through the features

Re: [cellml-discussion] Concerning the CellML Model Repository

2007-06-26 Thread Matt
On 6/26/07, Tommy Yu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matt wrote: I don't understand the purpose of this. It looks like you are inventing a versioning system to implement from scratch. That's what it looks like, but if you recall the software choices I have written down I have been

Re: [cellml-discussion] Concerning the CellML Model Repository

2007-06-26 Thread Matt
This is my view of where things should be heading: The main impetus for this thread is moving the cellml.org site forward. In this sense I would like to see a description of what it currently does and what features have been informally slated. Then I'd like to see a document that re-writes these

[cellml-discussion] Tracker for Roadmap

2007-06-26 Thread Randall Britten
Hi At last week's meeting, we listed some items for the updated roadmap for PcEnv. The existing roadmap/milestones list is quite out of date. I am considering using the PcEnv tracker to manage this list, in the hope that as features are implemented, they will be marked as resolved in the

Re: [cellml-discussion] Tracker for Roadmap

2007-06-26 Thread David Nickerson
Hi Randall, Two quick points. PCEnv is an Auckland tool and as discussed previously it should be kept quite distinct from the community sections of cellml.org - i.e., there shouldn't be a common tracker for PCEnv and the specifications and cellml.org etc. Secondly, Matt and I have been

[cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
Hi, There has been some discussion recently about how best to handle local CellML addresses (which can be used by local groups with an interest in CellML to arrange meetings and hold other discussions which are purely local in scope and not of interest to the broader CellML community). At the

Re: [cellml-discussion] Tracker for Roadmap

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote: Hi Randall, Two quick points. PCEnv is an Auckland tool and as discussed previously it should be kept quite distinct from the community sections of cellml.org - i.e., there shouldn't be a common tracker for PCEnv and the specifications and cellml.org etc. I

Re: [cellml-discussion] CellML tracker

2007-06-26 Thread David Nickerson
Andrew Miller wrote: Hi, At the Auckland CellML meeting today, we discussed the possibility of changing to a better tracker and moving some of the mailing list discussions onto that tracker. Everyone at the meeting agreed with this idea, so I am now looking for some input from the wider

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote: Hi Andrew, I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local communities with little interaction. The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like 'There is a meeting

Re: [cellml-discussion] CellML tracker

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote: Andrew Miller wrote: Hi, At the Auckland CellML meeting today, we discussed the possibility of changing to a better tracker and moving some of the mailing list discussions onto that tracker. Everyone at the meeting agreed with this idea, so I am now looking for

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread David Nickerson
Andrew Miller wrote: David Nickerson wrote: Hi Andrew, I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local communities with little interaction. The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like

Re: [cellml-discussion] CellML tracker

2007-06-26 Thread Randall Britten
Andrew Miller wrote: Hi, ... I would recommend Bugzilla (Randall also mentioned JIRA, but it seems to be a commercial product, and price aside, if we can't review the tracker source code I'm not sure we should trust it with our data). Jira provide their source code (surprising as that

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote: Andrew Miller wrote: David Nickerson wrote: Hi Andrew, I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local communities with little interaction. The intention is that

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread James Lawson
Andrew Miller wrote: Hi, There has been some discussion recently about how best to handle local CellML addresses (which can be used by local groups with an interest in CellML to arrange meetings and hold other discussions which are purely local in scope and not of interest to the broader

Re: [cellml-discussion] CellML tracker

2007-06-26 Thread Andrew Miller
David Nickerson wrote: Michael Dunstan just suggested Trac and Poi as being worth looking at too. I don't think Poi has the same level of features as Bugzilla (e.g. CC lists, etc...). are these CC lists any different to the subscription feature of the current plone

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread James Lawson
David Nickerson wrote: Hi Andrew, I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local communities with little interaction. For the same reasons we removed the cellml-tools mailing list, I would very much

Re: [cellml-discussion] Proposal: Local CellML team e-mail addresses

2007-06-26 Thread James Lawson
Andrew Miller wrote: David Nickerson wrote: Hi Andrew, I think this is an excessive response to a very minor problem. I very easily see this evolving into many separate and distinct local communities with little interaction. The intention is that these lists only be used for messages like