Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

D2.2: Community building: Impact of development workshops, dissemination and training activities, year 1 #42

Closed
minrk opened this issue Sep 8, 2015 · 22 comments

Comments

@minrk
Copy link
Contributor

@minrk minrk commented Sep 8, 2015

An important part of the success of the ODK project is linked to its ability to foster a community in the spirit of the open source projects it is built on. Part of this relies on the organization and participation to scientific and development events of many different scales and objectives. In this deliverable, we give a first overview of the actions taken during the first year of the project. This includes:

  • Organization of development workshops
  • Organization of dissemination workshops in different thematic linked to ODK
  • Training intervention in external events
  • Communication interventions and participation to external events
  • Actions taken to foster a community in developing countries

We describe each event with its specific goals and explain the exact implication of ODK in the organization and realization of the event. We give a general overview of the impact of single events, thus drawing a first draft of ODK impact as a whole, and describe future directions for the years to come.

@minrk minrk added this to the D2.2 milestone Sep 8, 2015
@nthiery nthiery modified the milestones: Month 12: 2016-08-31, D2.2 Mar 22, 2016
@bpilorget
Copy link
Contributor

@bpilorget bpilorget commented Aug 30, 2016

@VivianePons is the report over?

@VivianePons
Copy link
Contributor

@VivianePons VivianePons commented Aug 30, 2016

Not yet, I'm still waiting for some things back from people.

2016-08-30 13:53 GMT+02:00 bpilorget notifications@github.com:

@VivianePons https://github.com/VivianePons is the report over?


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#42 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADcG4FJUUMeXBDCaIGC53bhc_SdZyQ0Kks5qlBnAgaJpZM4F5ylW
.

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 7, 2016

@bpilorget. @kohlhase: I just added a description of the WP6 workshop in January in St Andrews. Please proofread!
https://github.com/OpenDreamKit/OpenDreamKit/blob/master/WP2/D2.2/events/2016-01-25-DKS.tex

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 7, 2016

Other than that, I agree with Benoît that this is good to go. I added a link to the current pdf above.

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 7, 2016

Note: the PO told me that we should get the referee reports for this June's review very soon, and she suggested that we might as well wait for them before we submit, in case there are special requests about our reports.

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 7, 2016

@VivianePons, @kohlhase
Oops, I had forgotten to write a blurb about our participation to CICM. Done and pushed. Needs proofreading :-)

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

a blurb about our participation to CICM.

this looks good, I have added more citations to the talks and tutorials.
The last line "see this [blog post]" is problematic, since the link is invisible, so I never thought to click, something needs to be done here.

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

suggested that we might as well for them before we submit, in case there are special requests about our reports.

that sounds very reasonable, let's do that.

@VivianePons
Copy link
Contributor

@VivianePons VivianePons commented Sep 9, 2016

I haven't looked at the current version, but the blog post could be added
to the bib file with proper url if not done already.

2016-09-09 9:54 GMT+02:00 Michael Kohlhase notifications@github.com:

suggested that we might as well for them before we submit, in case there
are special requests about our reports.

that sounds very reasonable, let's do that.


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#42 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADcG4HGOMVOzofm1LpLFrEEeH3EMGoE-ks5qoRDRgaJpZM4F5ylW
.

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

yes, that is probably the best way. I will do that.

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

I am reading, ...
I think that for Event 7 (the June HB meeting with @markuspf) Markus should probably also say something about all the code refactoring that went into the GAP kernel.

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

Also for Event 7 we should say what happened from the UPSud side. I remember that there was a little bit of progress on the SageMath exporter.

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

other than that, the report is OK from my side.

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 9, 2016

Done with the description of PSud's participation for Event 7.

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 9, 2016

The last line "see this [blog post]" is problematic, since the link is invisible, so I never thought to click, something needs to be done here.
Thanks for the feedback. That's just a standard latex hyperlink. Putting the URL in the text would be rather cumbersome/verbose in such cases. Do you mean that we should update the style file so that hyperlinks would be more proeminent? With my pdf viewer, the hyperlinked text appears with a blue box around it.

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 9, 2016

Speaking of hyperlinks: upon request from the reviewers, I have added our
deliverablereport style file to include the following at the end of all our reports:

``Disclaimer: for auditing and reviewing purposes, this document is self contained. Hyperlinks to external resources are meant as a convenience for the casual readers; they have been checked for correctness at the time of submission of the deliverable, but there is no guarantee that they will remain valid.''

Better formulation of course welcome,

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Sep 9, 2016

Two caveats about using citations for links:

  • It takes more time
  • It's less practical for the reader (two-clics away instead of one)

I would tend to reserve this for material that really deserves a citation (an actual paper, ...).

@kohlhase
Copy link
Member

@kohlhase kohlhase commented Sep 9, 2016

I would tend to reserve this for material that really deserves a citation (an actual paper, ...).

feel free to change back to the href, I do think a blog post is just as citable as any other paper.

@VivianePons
Copy link
Contributor

@VivianePons VivianePons commented Sep 9, 2016

I agree that we shouldn't cite every link but I think we should cite blog
post when it's relevant. Also, nothing stops you from putting a biblio ref
and a link...

2016-09-09 14:17 GMT+02:00 Michael Kohlhase notifications@github.com:

I would tend to reserve this for material that really deserves a citation
(an actual paper, ...).

feel free to change back to the href, I do think a blog post is just as
citable as any other paper.


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#42 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADcG4KwRa3Xjb2V_Uqcu6RHaPwnR7kKtks5qoU5lgaJpZM4F5ylW
.

@VivianePons
Copy link
Contributor

@VivianePons VivianePons commented Sep 11, 2016

Hi,

I quickly checked the document and it seems fine to me:

  • I have added the slides of relevant talks to the "annexes" folder
  • I have counted around 129 PM for this (from the file SitesAndPM.md) not sure where I should put it
  • The report-final does not seem up to date but I cannot update it myself because I have an issue with the biblio (when I compile the report .tex I get Florian's talk twice but because you didn't use my report.bib file, I'm not sure how it works...) @kohlhase could you check and update report-final.pdf?
@bpilorget
Copy link
Contributor

@bpilorget bpilorget commented Oct 24, 2016

Deliverables update

@VivianePons As you know , during the interim review in Bremen, reviewers gave advice to improve deliverables. UPSud tried to follow their advice by updating D5.1 #107
The main critic is that deliverables should be static document. Therefore we went through the #107 report to check if all links were still working and also if the information contained on the links was necessary for the understanding of the report.
As a result when it was necessary annexes were added to the #107 report.

Can you please do the same for this deliverable and add annexes when need be?

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

@nthiery nthiery commented Jan 4, 2017

Report submitted on the EU portal.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.