Closed edkerk closed 4 years ago
@edkerk I think model
would be the best option, in line with e.g. memote repos but also more accurate, as the folder should contain just the one model but in different formats.
BTW have you guys seen https://github.com/opencobra/cookiecutter-memote ? Looks like it's more or less similar to the efforts being done here, maybe would be good to align both standards :)
@BenjaSanchez indeed the efforts better be aligned.
Those Configuration Values
had been mostly implemented in HumanGEM
as metadata, which probably could be defined explicitly in standard-GEM
, aligning with cookiecutter.
Seems only model
gets +1 votes, and compatibility with the memote cookiecutter is a strong argument for going for model
.
@Hao-Chalmers there is indeed a need to have MIRIAM-style metadata at the model level. To me, neither implementation (config values, Human-GEM metadata) is perfect, but it sounds like there should be a general discussion around this in order to formalize something.
@BenjaSanchez I really liked what cookiecutter
aimed to do - basically putting all the structure in place. And to that end, standard-GEM
aims this too, while trying to increase transparency.
Summary: we go for model
.
Description of the issue:
What should be the name of the folder containing the model files?
modelFiles
models
model
Note that option 2 and 3 are in line with the style of the other folders (
code
,data
).Expected feature/value/output:
/models
or/model
Current feature/value/output:
/modelFiles