[Users] Propose thorns for inclusion in the EinsteinToolkit

[Barry Wardell]

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Erik Schnetter <schnetter at cct.lsu.edu>wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Barry Wardell <barry.wardell at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Ian Hinder <ian.hinder at aei.mpg.de>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I believe the requirements for inclusion should be that the code has
> tests
> >> and documentation, is considered by an independent reviewer to be of
> >> sufficiently high quality, and is expected to be generally useful.  I
> think
> >> all we are missing is documentation and the independent reviewer
> >> (volunteers?).
> >
> >
> > What type of documentation is required? Currently there is only a basic
> > README file. Should there also be some sort of Cactus documentation which
> > describes the arrangement/thorns? Is there anything more than this
> needed?
>
> There needs to be documentation, but it does not have to be at the
> thorn level -- documenting all thorns combined works fine. I would
> expect information on how to use the thorns, how to regenerate them,
> and how to modify or add a new metric. In particular, the thorns'
> parameters need to be explained. Test cases are also required.


OK, I will write documentation for all thorns combined as most of the
information is common between them. There are already Cactus testsuites and
correctness tests for all of the thorns.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120426/3419fe42/attachment.html