search

ucum-org / ucum

https://ucum.org
Other
48 stars 10 forks source link

Which is the reference document (file) for UCUM? #243

Closed dr-shorthair closed 1 year ago

dr-shorthair commented 1 year ago

The Avogadro constant (definition of mole) was already updated to the 2018 value in ucum-source.xml and in ucum.xml. However, ucum-essence.xml and ucum.html still have the older value and the latter is what is most visible on the website.

@timbrisc Which is the source-of-truth? What is the process for generating the derived artefacts?

Related to #242 and #156

gschadow commented 1 year ago

Underlying cause of this is #244. We just need to push out a release, that's all.

gschadow commented 1 year ago

Where is our ticket adjudication workflow from the old trac site?

We need to be able to mark this ticket as reject/duplicate or something. We used to have a sophisticated workflow in trac and I was promised that github was better and could do that too. But I don't see any button where I can propose a resolution of this ticket. Unless we have such a thing, we will not be efficient resolving issues as they will just linger on and on.

gschadow commented 1 year ago

Finally to your question "which is the reference document" or source of truth? It is ucum-source.xml, nothing else. This ucum-essence.xml is just an automatic extract from the source, and it goes with the releases. If we operate release-free we can also just automatically run the build scripts every time ucum-source.xml is updated.

dr-shorthair commented 1 year ago

"which is the reference document" or source of truth? It is ucum-source.xml, nothing else

Good. That is where I have been making proposed changes (in my fork, which are then the object of the Pull-requests).

Regarding your @gschadow questions about GitHub workflow - it can be configured many ways. I was not familiar with the Trac process, which was why I never got far in making proposals.

In your email you propose all working on a single branch. IMAO that is a bad idea since it does not allow for multiple solutions at different levels of maturity, proposed by different people, to be tested at the same time. Git is rather different to earlier Version Control Systems precisely because it does rely on anyone working on the project keeping their own local 'cache' of the files which is not merged into the main branch until the relevant workflow has been executed. This workflow can be manual, or it can be automated ('continuous integration'), @timbrisc is responsible for getting that up and running. And I think currently he is the only person who can merge changes into the ucum-org/ucum repository.

dr-shorthair commented 1 year ago

Here's a couple of documents that explain Git Flow and GitHub Flow development strategies: https://www.gitkraken.com/learn/git/git-flow https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/quickstart/github-flow

This diagram captures the Git Flow.

gschadow commented 1 year ago

Regarding your @gschadow questions about GitHub workflow - it can be configured many ways. I was not familiar with the Trac process, which was why I never got far in making proposals.

I don't totally appreciate that. You chose to ignore it just because you demanded to move to git. I agreed to move to git based on the assurance that it could (and would!) do all the things Trac / svn did. So this remains a bug.

I don't think we should go from scratch. The original adjudication workflow that was in place should be implemented here and then we can discuss if anything is wrong with that.

But then that discussion is off topic here, #246 is where that belongs.

This ticket is answered and should be closed.

dr-shorthair commented 1 year ago

You chose to ignore it

Not exactly. I was unfamiliar with Trac and didn't have time to figure it out. I've no doubt it was a good system. But all version control systems have a learning curve, and I didn't have a project allocation to learn another one for an initiative that was interesting but peripheral to my work at the time.

just because you demanded to move to git.

The UCUM AB was fairly dormant for several years, so when it rebooted with some new membership and leadership, it felt like the right time to at least ask the question about the platform it was hosted on. I suggested Github, because many contemporary open projects, including all the ones I am working on, use Git hosted by GitHub or GitLab. But I wasn't the decision maker here, or even the only one to suggest GitHub.

dr-shorthair commented 1 year ago

@gschadow answered

"which is the reference document" or source of truth? It is ucum-source.xml, nothing else