CodeHosting » History » Version 1

Chris Cannam, 2010-09-20 11:55 AM

1 1 Chris Cannam
h1. The code hosting problem
2 1 Chris Cannam
3 1 Chris Cannam
h2. Assumptions found in my head
4 1 Chris Cannam
5 1 Chris Cannam
* Audio and music research groups in institutions *lack effective access to version control systems*
6 1 Chris Cannam
7 1 Chris Cannam
  * This is certainly historically true of C4DM; what about other groups?
8 1 Chris Cannam
9 1 Chris Cannam
* Researchers often want to *share their code selectively* with other researchers in the same field but in other institutions
10 1 Chris Cannam
11 1 Chris Cannam
  * Internal code hosting doesn't usually facilitate this
12 1 Chris Cannam
13 1 Chris Cannam
* Individual researchers may be happy to host their code in *existing public hosting services* (e.g. SourceForge, Google Code), but their supervisors are likely to be less keen
14 1 Chris Cannam
15 1 Chris Cannam
  * External facilities are harder to keep track of; supervisors don't necessarily like the requirement that everything should be open source, and these facilities won't host private code
16 1 Chris Cannam
17 1 Chris Cannam
_How can we test these assumptions?_
18 1 Chris Cannam
19 1 Chris Cannam
_If these assumptions are correct, how do we solve these problems?_
20 1 Chris Cannam
21 1 Chris Cannam
h3. We could encourage and train institutions to provide better internal code hosting facilities
22 1 Chris Cannam
23 1 Chris Cannam
For example, by providing nice recipes, templates, support etc for setting up well-featured, friendly services.
24 1 Chris Cannam
25 1 Chris Cannam
This is certainly likely to improve code development practice in an institution that has no facility at present. But it doesn't really solve the "selective sharing" problem, or help very much with the desire to move toward publication of software and reproduceable research -- unless we can also convince people to make their own internal hosting facility a public one.
26 1 Chris Cannam
27 1 Chris Cannam
Audio and music research groups typically are too small to be successfully providing their own facilities.  To do this well, they really need a horizontal approach -- facilities provided to all research areas by a common CS or IT service.  Some institutions (how many? which?) will have this already
28 1 Chris Cannam
29 1 Chris Cannam
30 1 Chris Cannam
_and/or_
31 1 Chris Cannam
# Encourage institutions to make better use of existing external open-source code hosting facilities
32 1 Chris Cannam
_and/or_
33 1 Chris Cannam
# Provide a middle ground, our own hosting facility that institutions can treat as internal (private projects, easily tracked, etc) but can use for public hosting when they feel able
34 1 Chris Cannam
35 1 Chris Cannam
How could we do each of these?
36 1 Chris Cannam
37 1 Chris Cannam
# Educate decision-makers and about the advantages of open publication, 
38 1 Chris Cannam
39 1 Chris Cannam
Advantages and disadvantages of each:
40 1 Chris Cannam
41 1 Chris Cannam
# Takes advantage of free existing facilities, no outlay; *but*