I agree. That's why I'm trying to pool the Gitters together as a chatroom for helping people use the package, but whenever we find that something is a bug / feature request, give a nudge "please open an issue". Or whenever a developer discussion does happen in chat, a summary is posted as an issue to continue the discussion there.This is what's done with Plots.jl and you can see that there's a lot of activity helping people install Plots.jl in the Gitter, and a good number of issues on the repo for logging development issues / feature requests. So instead of being a substitute, they compliment each other.
On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 9:12:37 AM UTC-7, Viral Shah wrote: > > I personally feel that Gitter is great for helping out people who are > starting out, but hope it doesn’t become a substitute for developer > discussions and the development process. > > On github, with issues, there is a documented and organized trail for > posterity that helps onboard new developers and such. > > -viral > > > > > On Aug 26, 2016, at 7:45 PM, Chris Rackauckas <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > The Bio.jl Gitter is part of the BioJulia org. It's setup nicely in that > none of the other channels within the BioJulia sphere have Gitters so you > know which channel to go to. I modeled it after that. It would be > interesting if channels like this were setup under the JuliaLang repo, but > I am not sure what that means with the ability to share mod powers (usually > not that bad from Gitter folk, though it's nice to be able to change the > integrations around). > > > > On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 3:24:25 AM UTC-7, Viral Shah wrote: > > Chris, Thanks for consolidating efforts and setting things up to set up > a community for all kinds of differential equations. > > > > I wonder if we should have a DiffEq channel/room on the julia gitter > rather than a new gitter? Just a thought. For now, many projects do have > their own gitter - like Bio.jl. > > > > -viral > > > > > > > On Aug 26, 2016, at 4:41 AM, Chris Rackauckas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > This has already been done. As of last night we have JuliaDiffEq where > we have moved Sundials and ODE. DifferentialEquations will follow soon, and > I am talking with the owner of ODEInterface to see if that should go there > as well (and if it should be expanded). > > > > > > If you have any ideas, open an issue on the Roadmap repo. We should > find out what the other SDE/PDE packages are and coordinate efforts/APIs. > The other SDE packages are pretty basic, and I don't think it would be > useful to deal with simple things like StochasticEuler. Bridge.jl may be > interesting: I know that it may need to be needed by DifferentialEquations > for more easily implementing stochastic integral equations and a few high > weak order methods, so it would be nice to pull it into the group. The idea > would that others could do similar tasks easier if this is all coordinated > together. > > > > > > My goal is to have DifferentialEquations.jl wrap all of the solvers > here. You can already use Sundials, ODEInterface, and ODE from > DifferentialEquations. More coordination is likely required to make the PDE > packages compatible (and I don't know of very many, JuliaFEM and HP-FEM?). > Probably the toolings for making FEM meshes and things like that should > spawn out to their own package and become more complete. Of course, others > will have their own reason for having compatible APIs. > > > > > > I just setup a unified Gitter. I think we should have the current ODE > and DifferentialEquations Gitters merge to this JuliaDiffEq one so that way > it will be easier to find help. > > > > > > On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 3:09:49 PM UTC-7, Christoph Ortner > wrote: > > > A separate organisation would be really welcome especially if it means > coordination of efforts on the development of DE-related work. > > > > > > -viral > > > > > > > >
