You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 9, 2023. It is now read-only.
Presentation materials for actual live tutorials on using PlasmaPy that we would eventually like to host at events like SciPy, universities etc
I would argue that 2 is:
out of scope, programming and learning resources are probably better shared on Riot or the mailing list (in fact, we probably should have a Resources thread there...)
confusing, as it introduces two actual places to submit tutorials - this repo and plasmapy/examples in the main repo, more on this in a while
If 3 is the case, then sure, this repo is useful but needs renaming and its purpose needs to be stated clearly.
If 1 is the case, we need to address the issue that having two separate places to submit examples/tutorials is terrible. I was thinking,
Wouldn't it be nice to have a separate repository for examples, so that CI doesn't have to build them on every commit and they don't slow down development?
But at the same time, doesn't that introduce terrible risk for each PR breaking existing examples?
I think this disadvantage outweighs the single "neatness" advantage.
Thus, I think the best way to proceed unless 3 is the case is to either:
Hi everyone, I basically just found this repo today, and I'm not sure I was aware of it before or just forgot.
I think we need to talk about what the idea behind this is. It looks like people had different things in mind:
I would argue that 2 is:
plasmapy/examples
in the main repo, more on this in a whileIf 3 is the case, then sure, this repo is useful but needs renaming and its purpose needs to be stated clearly.
If 1 is the case, we need to address the issue that having two separate places to submit examples/tutorials is terrible. I was thinking,
I think this disadvantage outweighs the single "neatness" advantage.
Thus, I think the best way to proceed unless 3 is the case is to either:
or
I'm gonna have a followup to this in a few minutes on the main repo...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: