[kepler-dev] Re: Fwd: Re: [SDM-SPA] RFC new directory structure

[Bertram Ludaescher]

>>>>> "TC" == Terence Critchlow <critchlow1 at llnl.gov> writes:
TC> 
>> These are huge (but good) changes.  Finalizing it quickly is good, but be 
>> sure to give everyone time to react, considering that some key developers 
>> (e.g., Chad) are traveling.  I think at least 1 week for comments after 
>> the final revisions to the scheme is appropriate.  I think a formal 
>> proposal and vote is warranted for a change of this magnitude.
>> 
>> Matt
TC> 
TC> 
TC> Given this is likely to take at least 2 weeks (Chad needs to get back, 
TC> comments need to be incorporate, a proposal needs to be made, a week 
TC> passes, a vote occurs, then something hopefully happens)  I suggest we 
TC> (LLNL) create our local repository in the "near-final" hierarchy so that we 
TC> can "formally propose" and vote on it - not that I have any idea how this 
TC> is supposed to work.

sounds good.

I think having these exchanges is very helpful and will contribute to
making the product better.

btw: it's really good that someone is actually pushing this directory
reorg. I know that it has been on the horizon for a while (several
Kepler folks have discussed it before I think), but noone was biting
the bullet.

until now! =B-)

Bertram



TC> 
TC> Matt's idea of functionally organizing the hierarchy is interesting. 
TC> However, I believe it is important that we are able to identify the SPA 
TC> work - including the actors we create and the ones we use - so a mix of 
TC> organization and function (ie spa.sdm.org/bio) could be a good compromise.
TC> 
TC> Terence