search

NCBI-Hackathons / Epigenomics_CWL

SCREW: A Reproducible Workflow for Single-Cell Epigenomics
MIT License
8 stars 15 forks source link

Migrate SCREW to an organisation space and rename from Epigenomics_CWL to Epigenomics-SCREW #26

Open oneillkza opened 7 years ago

oneillkza commented 7 years ago

Having SCREW inside the NCBI-Hackathons space has been raising some issues. Although we have permission to rename it, we don't have the ability to grant permissions to third-party tools (e.g. draw.io).

I'd like to create an organisation account (it would be Epigenomic-SCREW), and transfer the codebase there.

@bdecato @neksa @DCGenomics -- are you all OK with this?

DCGenomics commented 7 years ago

Is there some reason ncbi-hackathons couldn't give you permission to do the former?

On Mar 24, 2017 7:15 PM, "oneillkza" notifications@github.com wrote:

Having SCREW inside the NCBI-Hackathons space has been raising some issues. Although we have permission to rename it, we don't have the ability to grant permissions to third-party tools (e.g. draw.io).

I'd like to create an organisation account (it would be Epigenomic-SCREW), and transfer the codebase there.

@bdecato https://github.com/bdecato @neksa https://github.com/neksa @DCGenomics https://github.com/DCGenomics -- are you all OK with this?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NCBI-Hackathons/Epigenomics_CWL/issues/26, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFePtVlf_j1xURvsobCMYjBVDNyW1pMyks5rpE6MgaJpZM4Mo3QJ .

neksa commented 7 years ago

Yes from me. I also think we need a space outside the hackathons and create a fork there. I used NCBI-hackathons as organization name at quay but we probably need something more specific? Shall I rename it to Epigenomics-SCREW as well?

What do you suggest regarding Paul's workflow? I should probably separate screw and sidearm completely. Alex

On Mar 24, 2017, at 7:15 PM, oneillkza notifications@github.com wrote:

Having SCREW inside the NCBI-Hackathons space has been raising some issues. Although we have permission to rename it, we don't have the ability to grant permissions to third-party tools (e.g. draw.io).

I'd like to create an organisation account (it would be Epigenomic-SCREW), and transfer the codebase there.

@bdecato @neksa @DCGenomics -- are you all OK with this?

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

oneillkza commented 7 years ago

@DCGenomics , I'm pretty sure you could grant us permission each time we need it, but it would definitely be easier if we could do it ourselves. I also think it would be great to grow the project out of the hackathon space so it can stand on its own.

@neksa suggested forking it rather than moving, which I think would be a good solution. I think moving would completely pull up roots and leave no trace, and I'd rather there be a record within NCBI-hackathons, which a fork would allow.

@neksa, yes, I think it would be good to separate Screw and Sidearm; what we could do initially would be to leave the existing image under NCBI-hackathons on quay (until Paul has decided what to do with that), and create an Epigenomics-SCREW organisation moving forward to house the screw image.

bdecato commented 7 years ago

+1 to the current title: migrating SCREW to an organization space and renaming it to Epigenomics-SCREW.

One other thought is to modify the README.md files in each of the repositories to link to each other: including a History section in the new repo that explains that the project grew out of a hackathon, and a Future Work section in the old repo that links to the organization.

oneillkza commented 7 years ago

Done! See https://github.com/Epigenomics-SCREW/SCREW

I've also invited everyone to the organisation. Once you're in and we have permissions set up, I think we can close this issue.

oneillkza commented 7 years ago

And yes, definitely +1 to the history section.

DCGenomics commented 7 years ago

Still not quite sure I see the necessity, as I could just make you guys admin on the repo, but you seem pretty set on this, and therefore I would request the following.

Go with the forking plan for the new org, and then put a redirect link (to the most current work on the project) at the top of the old readme, so people can find the new work quickly.

Cheers!

Ben

On Mar 24, 2017 7:58 PM, "oneillkza" notifications@github.com wrote:

@DCGenomics https://github.com/DCGenomics , I'm pretty sure you could grant us permission each time we need it, but it would definitely be easier if we could do it ourselves. I also think it would be great to grow the project out of the hackathon space so it can stand on its own.

@neksa https://github.com/neksa suggested forking it rather than moving, which I think would be a good solution. I think moving would completely pull up roots and leave no trace, and I'd rather there be a record within NCBI-hackathons, which a fork would allow.

@neksa https://github.com/neksa, yes, I think it would be good to separate Screw and Sidearm; what we could do initially would be to leave the existing image under NCBI-hackathons on quay (until Paul has decided what to do with that), and create an Epigenomics-SCREW organisation moving forward to house the screw image.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NCBI-Hackathons/Epigenomics_CWL/issues/26#issuecomment-289170470, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFePtRePHUDqo8BXjepCkRmh9EOfjy4yks5rpFirgaJpZM4Mo3QJ .