search

HSF / documents

Repository for HSF documents (e.g. technical notes)
6 stars 29 forks source link

CWP Referee Comment improvements from Graeme #110

Closed graeme-a-stewart closed 5 years ago

graeme-a-stewart commented 5 years ago

I dealt with many of the comments from the referees for the CSBS version of the CWP. There are many commits as I managed each edit as a separate entity to avoid too much confusion (and easier to rebase any modifications). However, I would squash on acceptance.

The comments I handled I marked up with strike-through in the tracking Google Doc. They should be ticked off in #105 too.

(There are some trivial whitespace cleaning changes in the first commit - the atom editor just likes to do that...)

graeme-a-stewart commented 5 years ago

@davidlange6 - very weird that you were never in the HSF developer group, so I invited you now.

davidlange6 commented 5 years ago

here is a nice (but old) cross experiment reference that makes the point

https://indico.cern.ch/event/3580/contributions/1768716/attachments/712802/978580/hep_offline_life_cycle.pdf

(I don't find proceedings)

and a more recent HSF talk (also by Pete)

https://indico.cern.ch/event/297652/contributions/1657190/attachments/558837/769950/20140403-elmer-hepcollab.pdf

On Nov 7, 2018, at 11:00 AM, David Lange notifications@github.com wrote:

@davidlange6 commented on this pull request.

In CWP/papers/HSF-CWP-2017-01_roadmap/latex/cwp-main.tex:

@@ -227,7 +227,8 @@ \section{Software and Computing data management software to manage its share of WLCG resources.

In order to process the data, the 4 largest LHC experiments have written -more than 20 million lines of program code over the last 15 years. This +more than 20 million lines of program code over the last 15 years +\cite{1742-6596-898-7-072013}. This

I doubt we get to 20M from 4 experiments. but we had agreed to make this more vague regardless, no? Its on my list to find a reference from cms (which can be GitHub if all else fails).

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

graeme-a-stewart commented 5 years ago

OK, all the comments should be addressed now

graeme-a-stewart commented 5 years ago

OK, I think I am about done - going to rebase onto the current head of master and resolve conflicts

graeme-a-stewart commented 5 years ago

Yep, rebase is a delight!

eduardo-rodrigues commented 5 years ago

I'm aware of @davidlange6's PR that may conflict with this one. Shall we anyway proceed and accept this PR now? It's ready since yesterday as far as I can see.

graeme-a-stewart commented 5 years ago

Hi @eduardo-rodrigues - I have a few other updates to make, but no problem, I will start a new branch from the head of master.