From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
To: help-guix@gnu.org
Subject: persistent reproducibility ?
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:15:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ1H508UC5gZYSeoZAxzsnCoNac3CTm6eCAC5FSsx-BxQA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Hi Guixers,
Disclaimer: my background is about numerical analysis (PDE, Krylov
solver, etc.) and I am currently working in some Core Facility about
biology and bioinformatic (NGS pipelines, flow cytometry clustering,
etc.). Orthogonal communities but same issues. :-)
The typical research workflow is:
- Alice proposes new method and/or algorithm, publishes a paper and
illustrates that by the software `foo'. Let the best case: Alice
provides a Guix "recipe", and all the material is stored in Github
(let say). This software `foo' depends on both `bar' and `baz', one
also in Github and the other one included in the Guix package tree.
- It is easy for Bob to check out and experiment. Guix allows him to
straightforwardly build the bit identical `foo' (all dependencies
included). Nice!! Repeatability is there for free.
- New features are added to `foo', `bar' and `baz'. All the codes
evolve, especially the research ones.
- Now, Joe is implementing the Alice's method; science means
reproducible. And Joe would like to compare his implementation to the
Alice one provided by `foo'. However, how ? The `foo' "ecosystem" has
changed with the new features. Therefore, Joe has to navigate in the
Git tree of the Guix "recipe" of `foo', `bar', `baz' to be able to
produce the bit-identical `foo' used in the initial paper. I mean, it
is what I understand to do, and it does not seem reasonable.
My question is: does Guix provide any mechanism to build reproducible
software over the time ?
Last, `foo' and `bar' are stored in two Github repositories. And they
should disappear.
( I am not talking if it is good or not to use github, right now, it
just is used by many teams of researchers )
Could we used the Software Heritage initiative to maintain a kind of
persistency ?
https://www.softwareheritage.org
I do not know if my wishes make any sense.
All the best,
-simon
next reply other threads:[~2017-03-21 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-21 11:15 zimoun [this message]
2017-03-21 14:49 ` persistent reproducibility ? Alex Sassmannshausen
2017-03-21 16:19 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-03-22 17:39 ` zimoun
2017-03-23 8:44 ` Alex Sassmannshausen
2017-03-23 15:33 ` zimoun
2017-03-23 12:32 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2017-03-23 16:46 ` zimoun
2017-03-24 15:45 ` Ludovic Courtès
2017-03-25 13:07 ` zimoun
2017-03-24 5:39 ` Chris Marusich
2017-03-24 12:05 ` Quiliro
2017-03-26 9:39 ` Chris Marusich
2017-03-26 15:03 ` Quiliro
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJ3okZ1H508UC5gZYSeoZAxzsnCoNac3CTm6eCAC5FSsx-BxQA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
--cc=help-guix@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).