Daniel Russel wrote:
> Sounds good. It would be nice to have tests run on experimental too.
Well, the intention was to run the tests but not fail the build if the
tests fail. But if people don't look at the build logs, it doesn't make
a lot of difference whether the tests are run or not...
> Does one module failing really affect the others?
Sure - the build system only updates the copy in /diva1 if all of the
modules succeed, so everything is in a consistent state.
> Also what does you comment about not putting things in experimental
> and then moving them to other modules mean? What exactly should go in
> experimental?
I mean a given feature (e.g. a restraint) should be expected to live in
a single module for its entire lifetime. The exp module is for
scientifically experimental features, as opposed to the core module
which includes features of general utility (e.g. distance restraints).
New features are proposed on imp-dev before going in, at which point I
can determine whether they belong in core, exp, or a more specific module.
Ben
--
http://salilab.org/~ben/
"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle