search

JuliaQuantum / JuliaQuantum.github.io

Public forum and website repository for JuliaQuantum.
http://JuliaQuantum.github.io
MIT License
39 stars 13 forks source link

Week 0:Introductory blog post #21

Closed amitjamadagni closed 9 years ago

amitjamadagni commented 9 years ago

@i2000s This is the introductory blog post. I have tested its appearance by hosting the github.io page on localhost. Though some of it needs some tweaks. I guess this would be the structure in updating the progress of the project. Hoping to hear some reviews.

acroy commented 9 years ago

I like it. In the first 3 paragraphs you can replace "would" by "will" :-)

garrison commented 9 years ago

Looks like a good introduction to me, but I was only able to skim it. I may try reading it again tomorrow if I get a chance.

jrevels commented 9 years ago

Looks good!

i2000s commented 9 years ago

@amitjamadagni Seems the repo for this project has been initialized. Should you be able to add a link to the repo on this blog post? https://github.com/JuliaQuantum/QuDynamics.jl

We may want the final confirm from @acroy -- and actually he is able to merge this post to the master branch. @acroy and a few others should be able to forward this post through our Google+ and Twitter networks afterwards. Thank everyone here!

amitjamadagni commented 9 years ago

@i2000s I have added the link of the repo to the blog. @acroy I guess this is ready to go and also I hope that Gemfile.lock should not be a problem. But please do let me know. Thanks once again @i2000s for all the help :)

acroy commented 9 years ago

I have no idea about Gemfile.lock - do we use that at all? I guess we have to merge this to see the impact ...

i2000s commented 9 years ago

The Gemfile.lock file is generated while you are running the localhost. It doesn't matter to the website on GitHub, and that file could be deleted in the future. The only issue I can tell is the title seems a little bit long so that the date of writing has been pushed away to the next line on the news page. But it is not crucial.

Hopefully plenty of peer-reviewers can be drawn to the correct repo.

acroy commented 9 years ago

@i2000s : Thanks for the info. We should probably remove the file then.

Hopefully plenty of peer-reviewers can be drawn to the correct repo.

On Monday (or so) we will send an email to julia-users and also write something via Twitter/Google+. Once we have some content we should link the new repo on our "projects" site.

i2000s commented 9 years ago

@acroy All sounds good. I will be sharing the progress among my personal network using the Share buttons on the right-hand-side of the webpage.