[CP2K:601] Re: cp2k release goals

[Teodoro Laino]

Maybe.. what we should really discuss is:  what do we want to have in  
a first release ?
I would say that this stuff of the rs_grid that you were doing, for  
example, is something quite important and I would
like to have it fully working and stable in the first release..
Maybe the best thing to do would be that all the people with their  
hands on the code would say something like:
1) In three/fours weeks/months I should finish something I would like  
to have in the first release..
or
2) I have nothing pending... for me this CVS status is releasable..
or
3) I'm working in implementing something and it's hard to have an  
idea when this stuff will be in.. so just release without this new  
stuff..

The problem, honestly, is that there's no control in what people are  
doing and no documentation about anything.
Normally in a developing team there should be something like a  
developing group meeting, in which everybody talks for 3-5 minutes  
about the status of the code on which he is working, possible release  
dates and ONLY technical things about the code (banned all the  
*interesting* talks about science and focusing only on the code  
status and technical decisions).
It should not be difficult to set it up.. even in a remote way (using  
for example something like skype or similarities). I believe that  
there's really no need to spend even 1 cent to organize something  
like that. Companies do this everyday.. Universities still have to  
understand the powerful of the remote-group-working.

So the question is quite obvious:
Why don't we have that?  How many would be really there actively  
participating?
I think very few.. though I would like to be surprised seeing  the  
opposite ;-)

cheers,
Teo

On 17 Jan 2008, at 22:40, Matt W wrote:

>
> Just to keep this bubbling over...
>
> What about starting a second CVS branch...not really a release
> candidate, but just an unwritten rule to not commit to it until really
> rather happy with the code; maybe with a commitment to write up some
> reasonable documentation.  I suspect that in 6 months it would be
> interesting to see the divergence and, perhaps, more obvious which
> bits of the code are stable (either entirely unused, or releasable)
> and where the volatile stuff is.
>
> Matt
>
> On Jan 8, 12:03 am, Axel <akoh... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 7, 11:35 am, Juerg Hutter <hut... at pci.uzh.ch> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>
>>> there is of course the problem of keyword combinations.
>>> Option A may be fully tested within the framework of option B
>>> but not with option C. Still option C is a tested and useful
>>> option as long as used without Option A.
>>> Now how do you flag this?
>>
>> in general, given the way cp2k is built, one should
>> consider any "production" option that does not work
>> with all other "production" options a bug.
>>
>> in practice this is of course not achievable, particularly
>> during the bootstrapping of a release process. one has to
>> take a leap of faith at some point. to some degree the
>> regression test library is a zeroeth order defense of bugs
>> creeping in through unrelated changes and bad interactions
>> between combinations of options.
>>
>>> Redo this with combinations of 3, 4, etc options.
>>
>>> Therefore this flags can only be a guideline, not a definite
>>> to be trusted flag.
>>
>> absolutely. but at least it will work the other way
>> around. if somebody uses an option that is not cleared
>> for production use, it can be detected systematically.
>> this should already take care of a lot of problems.
>>
>> nobody can expect everything to run perfect out of the box. ;-)
>>
>> cheers,
>>    axel.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Juerg
>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>> Juerg Hutter                   Phone : ++41 44 635 4491
>>> Physical Chemistry Institute   FAX   : ++41 44 635 6838
>>> University of Zurich           E-mail: hut... at pci.uzh.ch
>>> Winterthurerstrasse 190
>>> CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >