-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Collaboration with existing repositories #17
Comments
on one hand I do agree 100 and all the existing repos/links should be cited/listed. On the other hand I am just thinking that then we will have a nicely sorted HEP list and the rest (astro and cosmo) will be just jumbled under "here are links within links here go have at it". Hope I am making sense? This all goes with the scope in the issue #9 @bradkav pointed out. We can discuss more. |
It doesn't make sense to me to start yet another code registry , where ASCL already serves this purpose. More useful would be to have the codes listed here and not yet in ASCL, ot have them added to ASCL. Arguably (but we are working on it) you cannot say "give me all Nbody codes in ASCL", or by some selected criterion. |
yeah good points there. let's keep it as is for now and see how it evolves. I would like to hear others to give their 2 cents as well and also to sleep on it |
Just want to point out that we should be careful with the scope of this listing and also manage collaboration with other existing repositories. e.g. I would link ASCL for as many astro tools as possible and send any astro tools nominations there. Same goes for neutrino codes and send those to Peter Denton who's managing it.
What do the others think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: