Closed mayork closed 6 years ago
Hmmm, good question. It is a good idea I think, although it will put a small slowdown in how fast we can update things. Let's try it, and if it seems to be an impediment we can change it back?
or maybe should we wait till we submit the draft of the paper?
honestly, I think the place this would help most with is the paper... I don't want us to have continuously changing results as you pointed out yesterday. Perhaps we keep a branch that stays behind master then, and implement reviews later?
so you're saying branch something now called like 'paper draft'?
yeah something like that. On a side note, I am starting to realize what a pain in the neck it is to include code with papers... you have to make sure that you don't change it post-submission so that your results can be replicated :P
yeah for the engine paper i just dropped all the code (my repo and gpkit) into dropbox right after submitting and saved the commit hashes i used...that's really all you can do
I guess let's draw a line at commit bb3ac2d for the paper, and just keep updating master until we get the paper ready?
yeah that's fine with me...i'm going to write a small script that automates the multi-objective table so if there are no other updates to master before that we can bump the line up to include that on master. If not we can merge it later.
K. When you are done with that script, you can post the final commit hash here.
I think we have decided that it is a good idea. I would prefer to implement this somewhat informally, especially since the updates are likely just going to be in structure/documentation rather than actual modeling. @mayork if you agree please close.
@mayork closing this. I think we can coordinate this informally.
is this something we should do now that we are closing things out with the models?