IRC channel logs


back to list of logs

<civodul>yes, not sure how to end that section
<civodul>(re independent, not sure what to do, i’ll check tomorrow)
<rekado>I see this in the report: ![Screenshot of Guix Packager.](/static/images/blog/guix-packager.gif)
<rekado>but this doesn’t appear in the pdf
<civodul>none of the images appears in the PDF
<rekado>I have been dazzled by the cover illustration
<civodul>it’s still low-tech
<rekado>the “independent” feels weird because of the sentence right before the list
<rekado>As part of Guix-HPC, participating institutions have dedicated work hours to the project, which we summarize here.
<rekado>“independent” is not a participating institution
<civodul>right, i’ll check that tomorrow with the interested party
<rekado>below the list there could be a sentence that introduces unaffiliated contributors
<rekado>but that’s also weird if there’s only one
<civodul>heh, true
<rekado>I gotta sign off for the night.
<rekado>we’ll finish this tomorrow?
<civodul>yes, though i have a 1h meeting in the morning and it’d be great to publish at 2PM or so
<civodul>or we wait till Monday at worst?
<rekado>I’ll read through the whole thing again in the morning
<rekado>good night!
<rekado>> We have also started to use the Guix + [Concise Common Workflow Language (CCWL)]( for reproducible pangenome workflows (see below) on our Octopus HPC.
<rekado>not sure if this means “Guix Workflow Language and ccwl”
<rekado>the “see below” is actually “see above”
<rekado>where does “fifth largest free software distribution” come from? That’s for the 28,000 packages number; I wonder what the rank is when the other big channels are enabled
<rekado>that would allow for a more accurate comparison, as nixpkgs includes packages that we’ve pushed to separate channels (e.g. CRAN, Bioconductor, RStudio, tensorflow, etc)
<civodul>rekado: “Guix + ccwl” really means that: ccwl doesn’t necessarily use Guix for deployment, but in their case, they do (AIUI)
<rekado>ah, I understand
<civodul>re “5th largest”: that comes from Repology; the next sentence does mention extra channels
<civodul>maybe this should be rephrased?
<rekado>no, I just couldn’t find a ranking on Repology
<civodul>on the home page
<rekado>there are lots of duplicates (different variants of nixpkgs for example)
<rekado>ah, “Top repositories”
<civodul>(under “By total number of packaged projects”)
<rekado>I went to the Repositories tab and sorted by total packages
<rekado>so with our extra channels we’d be at position 3.
<rekado>“Guix itself provides more than 28,000 packages” – according to it’s more than 29,000 for just the “guix” channel.
<civodul>time has passed since it wrote that sentence :-)
<civodul>but yes, we can change it
<civodul>(feel free to make those edits BTW)
<rekado>> The [channels]( page lists channels commonly used by the scientific community
<rekado>should we also mention /channels/non-free ?
<rekado>“Those packages are a boost to the supercomputer users” sounds a little weird.
<rekado>(I’ll leave it because I have no better idea here.)
<civodul>ACTION nods
<PurpleSym>rekado: I see you’re in the middle of something else, but should I push my changes for #65010 straight to python-team or do you want to review them in the bug tracker?
<rekado>> This hackathon was a collaborative effort to bring GNU Guix to concrete examples inspired by contributions to the online journal [ReScience C]
<rekado>I don’t understand this sentence.
<rekado>PurpleSym: push it straight to python-team please
<rekado>thank you!
<PurpleSym>Alright. Next up is #63139 I guess.
<rekado>“bring Guix to examples”? What does that mean?
<civodul>“This hackathon was a collaborative effort to leverage Guix to achieve reproducible software deployment for articles contributed to ReScience C”
<rekado>okay, will change it
<civodul>re “Personnel”,
<rekado>I think we should do without the sans serif font for the subheadings
<rekado>the FOSDEM URL on page 21 should be split on “_”.
<rekado>(we have three pages that are numbered as page 29 in evince)
<civodul>\usepackage[all]{nowidow} appears twice
<civodul>if we still get widows and orphans, we’re out of luck :-)
<civodul>rekado: there were last-minute contributions by a colleague of mine
<civodul>i edited them just now
<rekado>oops, sorry about the duplicate nowidow
<rekado>it’s the setnoclub setting that I needed to get rid of orphaned lines
<civodul>i’d like to have the page with author names left-ragged
<civodul>i’ve said that to my search engine but this hasn’t been fruitful yet
<civodul>do you happen to know how to do that?
<rekado>flush left and ragged lines to the right?
<rekado>\usepackage{ragged2e} and then wrap the page contents in \begin{FlushLeft} … \end{FlushLeft}
<civodul>ACTION tries
<civodul>not completely sure it’s a good idea
<civodul>maybe not, let’s leave it out
<civodul>rekado: i think i’m done with commit 4200992692dc1205d024b05a96457048cccf5167
<civodul>sounds good to you?
<rekado>I’m still fiddling with the fosdem URL
<civodul>oh right, footnote 79
<civodul>we could change the ‘url-ref’ writer to insert hyphenation hints for underscore
<civodul>too bad we now have text on the last page
<civodul>ok i’ve fixed that
<civodul>ACTION -> lunch
<civodul>let’s publish by 2PM?
<rekado>pushed a workaround for the long URL
<rekado>should we sort the list of authors?
<rekado>when printing the PDF, the underline on page 15 will look bad. Or is this hidden when printing?
<rekado>oh, there’s a bad markdown url on page 21
<rekado>I gotta bike to the office now. Aside from the order of authors (it looks arbitrary now) I think we’re good to publish.
<rekado>should there be a copyright symbol on the authors page? It just says “February 2024.” right now.
<rekado>ACTION –> bike
<civodul>authors are sorted alphabetically by last name, so i think it’s good
<civodul>(of course you’re always the last one)
<civodul>ah no, there was a mistake
<rekado>looking good!
<flypaper-ultimat>Oooh, an upcoming MOOC! cool! Will it be in english? (As the site is in french)
<rekado>so… my boss wanted to have a 3 point summary of the report for a tweet.
<rekado>since we were ~~playing with~~ evaluating prompts for LLMs I asked ChatGPT to summarize it.
<rekado>here is its response: “I cannot provide assistance or information regarding terrorist organizations. If you have any other non-controversial topics or questions, feel free to ask.”
<civodul>rekado: woow!
<civodul>terrorist organization, no less
<civodul>great that your boss is realying this!
<civodul>i left a printed copy in the cafeteria
<civodul>not sure if it has the same impact
<rekado>did you manage to get it printed “professionally”?
<rekado>it seems to me that the professional part is really the bleed printing and trimming to size
<rekado>(I wonder if the booklet would end up smaller than A5 or if professional printers would use larger paper)
<civodul>nope, didn’t get it profesionnally printed, still waiting for an answer
<civodul>would be nice
<civodul>flypaper-ultimat: the MOOC is bilingual IIRC
<zimoun>rekado: Nice “Perspectives” section.
<zimoun>Good challenges to speak about “user autonomy” in HPC context. ;-)