[CP2K:504] Re: cp2k release goals

[luca]

Hi all,
I am a very newbie user cp2k and think that keep a 
a cp2k release it is very important point for the user/developer community.
There are some technical problems about  release,
but I want to add only my personal idea. (Excuse me for my poor English....)
Most persons with not equivalent CV can use famous (some not free and not good ) programs because there are
a lot of documentations, user guides, howto, and case studies. 
In contrast there are some very good and free program that are unknow/unused to the community 
and they seem do not have a lot of documentation. Is there a relationship? 
Make some tutorials or case studies, can help to debug the program and  can be 
a good start point for old user and new user.
It is only another suggestion....I hope that it is interesting

Ciao
  Luca



> 
> Hi Axel, hi all,
> 
> that's a very good point and you will have my full support for it!
> I fully understand that one of the weakness of cp2k is the lack of a  
> proper release, that's why
> I always was/am for starting releasing the code.
> 
> Discussing many times with other developers we always stopped the  
> "release" topic because
> we all agreed that somehow we had not enough man power to keep a  
> developer tree and a
> release tree.
> 
> But (there's always a but...) if there is anyone out of there willing  
> to offer some man-power
> in order to FULLY keep the release tree, this would be the keystone  
> in order to solve the big issue
> related with releasing cp2k.
> I Mean with "keeping a release tree" all the kind of "dirty" job  
> connected with it (possible bug
> fixes, testing on several architectures, etc)? Of course, I think you  
> will have some kind of help from
> developers (at least from me), but keep in mind that the person  
> willing to keep the release should
> put most of the work on it.
> 
> Regarding where branching the release w.r.t. the developer tree, with  
> the present implementation speed
> it would be anyway difficult to wait for possible implementation, so  
> what I suggest is to fix a date for a release,
> branch the release tree, fully "clean" that tree (i.e. take out  
> features not fully working and leave only the ones
> tested). All other pending implementations will be for the next one  
> (we should also decide the period (1 year?) for
> keeping a standard release speed).
> 
> In any case I would be for setting a set of rules on how to release.  
> I'm not an expert about that but a sort of discipline
> is absolutely mandatory in my opinion (I'm trying to push it harder  
> also for the developers' tree).
> 
> Anyway once there will be one offering himself as volunteer we can  
> really start to plan everything.
> Hope releasing cp2k will be soon a goal!
> 
> Ciao,
> teo
> 
> On 4 Jan 2008, at 12:59, Jörg Saßmannshausen wrote:
> 
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Happy New Year as well!
> >
> > I second Alex' suggestion and I volunteer for the different platforms.
> > I can offer:
> > AMD: Opteron and AMDx2 (debian etch, 64 bit)
> > Intel: Xeon (debian etch, 32bit, 2.80GHz) and some old PIII (debian  
> > etch,
> > Coppermine, 866 MHz).
> > I got access to the latest Intel Compiler (10.x) and also some  
> > Portland
> > compilers (if needed).
> > Most of the machines are clustered with either GbE oder 100 Mbit  
> > and we are
> > using MPICH2 as a MPI (yes, I know about OpenMPI ;-) ).
> > Maybe that helps a bit and encourages others to work on the project  
> > as well.
> >
> > All the best from Graz
> >
> > Jörg
> >
> >> == 1 of 1 ==
> >> Date: Thurs, Jan 3 2008 7:44 am
> >> From: Axel
> >>
> >>
> >> happy new year everybody!
> >>
> >> since the beginning of a new year is also a time for
> >> making plans and resolutions, i'd like to revive a subject
> >> that has been discussed quite a bit, but is important to
> >> many cp2k _users_: a cp2k release.
> >>
> >> IMO cp2k has gained significant maturity over the last
> >> year(s) and despite plenty of new and exciting developments,
> >> many cp2k users simply need a point of reference version that
> >> (super)computing center staff can support for them and where
> >> one can write pre-and post-processing tools for without having
> >> to change the code every other day or so.
> >>
> >> in order set the bar not too high, i'd like to simply start
> >> a discussion on what features are ready to be used for
> >> production or which features people would (realistically!!)
> >> like to see in a release and which needs most urgent fixing.
> >>
> >> once this is settled, the next step would be to gang up and
> >> collect and run proper release tests on as many different
> >> platforms as possible and finally find people that are willing
> >> to maintain a release branch (i.e. carry over bugfixes from
> >> the development, maintain backward compatibility).
> >>
> >> what do you all think?
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >>     axel.
> >
> > -- 
> > *************************************************************
> > Jörg Saßmannshausen
> > Institut für chemische Technologie organischer Stoffe
> > TU-GrazIn any case I would be for setting a set of rules on how to release.  
I'm not an expert about that but a sort of discipline
is absolutely mandatory in my opinion (I'm trying to push it harder  
also for the developers' tree
> > Stremayrgasse 16
> > 8010 Graz
> > Austria
> >
> > phone: +43 (0)316 873 8954
> > fax: +43 (0)316 873 4959
> > homepage: http://sassy.formativ.net/
> >
> > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
> > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> >
> > >
> 
> 
> > 
>