On 6 Feb 2020, at 16:03, Erik Schnetter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:47 AM Roland Haas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: * Are we ready to turn off CactusCode.org<http://CactusCode.org>? ** all in favor for moving I notice that this topic has been mentioned in the notes on the Einstein Toolkit mailing list, but has not been announced (in an email of its own), nor has it been mentioned on the Cactus mailing lists at all. I understand that most of the active development these days is happening on the context of the Einstein Toolkit, and that maintaining the cactuscode.org<http://cactuscode.org> domain web server seems like a burden, but Cactus is usable by itself, and publicly stating that Cactus is subsumed by the Einstein Toolkit greatly reduces the impact of the Toolkit on the computational science side. This probably won't affect physics funding, but this will make it more difficult to obtain funding from non-astrophysics sources. For example, CISE might ask why they should fund an astrophysics-only project where the maintainers decided deliberately to restrict the target audience of their software. I agree. For some of the non-NR projects I am now working on, I feel like I'm constantly missing and reinventing things that Cactus provides. Some of these projects might benefit from being Cactus thorns. Already, selling Cactus to people might be a little difficult, due to the learning curve and the extra "baggage" that you need to learn. This wouldn't be helped by Cactus being perceived as "a relativity code". -- Ian Hinder Research Software Engineer University of Manchester, UK
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users
