[Om] binary prefixes
amc at win.tue.nl
Mon Aug 7 15:37:42 CEST 2006
OK, It seems we have a committee now, consisting of
Paul Libbrecht, Bill Naylor, Olga Caprotti,
(not completely confirmed) David Carlisle and Mike Dewar,
and me (Arjeh Cohen),
responsible for the CD management at teh OM web site.
I asked Paul:
> >>..... It starts with Paul, I
> >>suppose, who is setting up the mother of all OpenMath repositories and
> >>some method of editing and up/downloading files from a distance (svn?).
Here are some reactions to his reaction:
> There's an svn for the source of the web-site:
> we could make a page about "how to build the site" if wished. It's
> currently built with ant and a load of XSL, mostly inherited from David
> and Mike.
Most important seem to me that there be a file making clear what happened to the CDs
(official, contributed etc.) that each committee member can edit.
> I think what we need is a way to show comments and links to CDs... I
> would love to use trackback if possible.
> In general, a procedure to discuss CDs, decide on their evolution, and
> *display the evolution* is something we need to discuss more.
Well. I would be in favor of a documentation that can be put into
effect very quickly rather than a fancy method that takes an
unspecified amouont of time to be in place. I would also like to
suggest that one of us...Paul again?... makes a beginning of the file
and that we improve the format as we go along. Perhaps just recording
all official changes (with name of the responsible person, reason for
change, dates) will do. Thinking a little more, it is probably much
better to have an index file (or a few) for all CDs that are around
(such indexes exist to a certain extent thanks to David Carlisle's
earlier work) and a separate file for each CD(name).
> >>David Carlisle and Mike Dewar, with their great experience and
> I would believe that om at openmath.org is not overloaded yet and we should
> use it... People can always "retract" to om-announce.
> For real technical worries, I would leave infrastructure at openmath.org
> but CD evolution discussion should happen right there on this list, I feel.
> (members any worry ?)
Discussion on the existing mailing list is fine. But these discussion
files (of all emails) tend not be interesting to the potential user of
the CDs, while the extended log suggested above will be. It cuts short all unnecessary
side paths, and just makes clear a) what happened with previous
versions and b) why changes have been made.
More information about the Om