Closed mattwthompson closed 2 years ago
Going forward are we going to support both create_hoomd_simulation
in mbuild and a metadata/file based solution in the new backend? If so, should we share code between the solutions so there is no duplication of effort? @b-butler @bdice.
Long-term this should only exist in the backend; however we have for a few years now used mbuild/formats
as a staging ground for various glue (but going from ParmEd
to whatever engine object/file). I think supporting them both, with whatever duplicated code, is the best approach now
Close with #698
Describe the behavior you would like added to mBuild HOOMD-blue will soon go through a sizeable API change to v3.0. See the tag here. We should probably check in once in a while to make sure our workflows aren't broken when it is released, and also consider pinning >=3.0 then.
Describe the solution you'd like Updating functions like
create_hoomd_simulation
as per the API changesDescribe alternatives you've considered None, and waiting for breaking changes to be released is something we should avoid given the heads-up we have
Additional context Tagging @joaander @jennyfothergill @chrisjonesBSU