Hi Please consider joining the weekly Einstein Toolkit phone call at 10 am US central time on Mondays. As usual, you can find instructions how to join on the following web site:
http://einsteintoolkit.org/community/support/ In short: the number is (+1) 225-578-4942 or (+1) 866-573-0359 and the conference id is 118682#. In addition to anything that might be brought up at the meeting I would like to discuss the following points: - incoming Currently we do have quite a collection piling up in incoming. This is good. However, now it the best time to work on these, deciding about the faith of these contributions. Doing so means that they should get tested by someone else than someone from the contributing group, ideally multiple maintainers. If we could do so at least for some until Monday this would be great, but realistically we first probably need to remind everyone what these are actually about. So: I would like each author/contributor of the new modules to say just a few words about each of these. Also, please mention how well tested they are from the contributor's side (have they been built on a larger number of machines, or only on very few / are they used in production runs, ect) , and whether there exists sufficient documentation and testsuites to be able to include them as is. I created a README in the root of incoming where I would like to have a very short status indication of each of the contributions. We currently have in incoming: ADMDerivatives CartesianCoordinates CoreCollapseControl IDFileHydro MemSpeed PITTNullCode SphericalSlice Symmetry TOVSolverHot ZelmaniQuadWaveExtract In addition, there are tickets for inclusion of ZelmaniQuadWaveExtract [1], CartesianCoordiantes [2] and CoreCollapseControl [3], which each live in Zelmani [4]. Same goes here: please describe their current status (just very briefly). Please let me know if there is something else I missed for inclusion. - issues up for review There are currently 14 issues up for review, which is a rather high number. Issues up for review mean that someone already has put in enough time and work to come up with a solution that she/he thinks is worthy being considered as fix. What is not needed is a second pair of eyes to decide if this is ok, or should be changed in some way. Please consider going through that list [5] and help a few of these to finally pass. Frank Löffler [1] https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/1356 [2] https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/1357 [3] https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/1358 [4] git://carpetcode.org/Zelmani.git [5] https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/query?status=review&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=reporter&col=time&col=component&order=priority
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users
