[IPOL discuss] proposed redesign of www.ipol.im

[Nicolas Limare]

Hi,

> It makes me think that we discussed with Jean-Michel (some times in the
> past) the possibility to have a separate tab for the code:
> In this tab we could have a link to a tarball of the peer reviewed code,

I think it is important to keep all the peer reviewed material
together, in the same page, because this page is "the article", as
referenced by the DOI, and contains the manustcript (PDF soon), the
code and the data.

> but we could also add some additional release and optionally a git
> url. It would of course be important to make a clear distinction
> between This would allow to keep track of evolutions such as
> improvements/corrections/change of API in the code.

I currenly suggest all the authors to mention, with their article, a
link to an external page where they will distribute new versions of
the code. A git repository is a possibility, on dev.ipol.im or
anywhere else. I expect these links to be more visible after the PDF
transition. But do not think we should distribute additional releases
there, the correct place is on pages the authors control completely
and can update without assistance from IPOL admins, such as their
research web pages or a software forge.

IPOL is convenient but we should not try to use it to solve all the
problems the research community has with software management.
I think what we need here is a real software forge service (something
like sourceforge/github/bitbucket), with source version control,
announce mailing-lists, release distribution and bug tracking. This
has been proposed many times in CNRS meetings, nothing has been done
yet.

-- 
Nicolas LIMARE - CMLA - ENS Cachan    http://www.cmla.ens-cachan.fr/~limare/
IPOL - image processing on line                          http://www.ipol.im/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://tools.ipol.im/mailman/archive/discuss/attachments/20120323/bd774e1f/attachment.pgp>