From bob.obara at kitware.com Tue Jun 28 22:48:25 2016 From: bob.obara at kitware.com (Bob Obara) Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 22:48:25 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] Testing Data Message-ID: Hi All, I?ve created a possible new organization for testing data - checkout my new-organization branch in my CMB Testing Data Repo Let me know what you think. Bob Robert M. O'Bara, MEng. Assistant Director of Scientific Computing Kitware Inc. 28 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Clifton Park, NY 12065 Phone: (518) 881- 4931 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben.boeckel at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 08:10:40 2016 From: ben.boeckel at kitware.com (Ben Boeckel) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 08:10:40 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] Testing Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 22:48:25 -0400, Bob Obara wrote: > I?ve created a possible new organization for testing data - checkout > my new-organization branch in my CMB Testing Data Repo Link for the lazy :) : https://gitlab.kitware.com/bob.obara/cmb-testing-data/tree/new-organization --Ben From robert.maynard at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 09:08:39 2016 From: robert.maynard at kitware.com (Robert Maynard) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] Testing Data In-Reply-To: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> References: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: Thanks for the link ben! Thoughts: - Can we have consistent capitalization and plurality between the baseline folders ( CMB-Applications/Baseline && SMTK/baselines) - Plurality in general. I would prefer non plural forms for all directories ( Scene over Scenes / GeoTiff over GeoTiffs ) - MapFiles, PolyFiles, and SimulationFiles should have the Files section dropped - Looks like we are missing a STL folder, and a shallow water folder ( AdHShallowWater.simb.xml / AdHShallowWater.sbt ) Overall I like the layout, we just need to apply some polish. On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 22:48:25 -0400, Bob Obara wrote: >> I?ve created a possible new organization for testing data - checkout >> my new-organization branch in my CMB Testing Data Repo > > Link for the lazy :) : > > https://gitlab.kitware.com/bob.obara/cmb-testing-data/tree/new-organization > > --Ben > _______________________________________________ > Cmb-users mailing list > Cmb-users at computationalmodelbuilder.org > http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmb-users From ben.boeckel at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 09:18:17 2016 From: ben.boeckel at kitware.com (Ben Boeckel) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:18:17 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] Testing Data In-Reply-To: References: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 09:08:39 -0400, Robert Maynard wrote: > - Can we have consistent capitalization and plurality between the > baseline folders ( CMB-Applications/Baseline && SMTK/baselines) FWIW, I'd prefer all-lowercase. --Ben From bob.obara at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 10:02:41 2016 From: bob.obara at kitware.com (Bob Obara) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:02:41 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] Testing Data In-Reply-To: <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> References: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: <392DC321-F6EE-4641-9132-51B52FFEEB91@kitware.com> So Combining Ben and Rob?s comments we would have something like: cmb-application or cmb_application (in this case we could probably ditch the cmb part and just call it application - I?m just using this as an example style guide) - I?m leaning towards _ over -; Other comments: Missing stl directory - will add. There are a bunch of things in the top level directory that I?m not sure where they belong (or if they are just duplicates): AdHShallowWater.* cmb-testing-data.marker simpleadh.dat Also - There is a Simulations directory that look tests (for ModelBuilder?) Should it be moved under attribute? Perhaps the stuff under attribute/test should be attribute/test/smtk and the stuff in Simulations be renamed attribute/test/application ? Let me know what you think! Bob Robert M. O'Bara, MEng. Assistant Director of Scientific Computing Kitware Inc. 28 Corporate Drive Suite 101 Clifton Park, NY 12065 Phone: (518) 881- 4931 > On Jun 29, 2016, at 9:18 AMEDT, Ben Boeckel wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 09:08:39 -0400, Robert Maynard wrote: >> - Can we have consistent capitalization and plurality between the >> baseline folders ( CMB-Applications/Baseline && SMTK/baselines) > > FWIW, I'd prefer all-lowercase. > > --Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yumin.yuan at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 10:04:45 2016 From: yumin.yuan at kitware.com (Yumin Yuan) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:04:45 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] [Smtk-developers] Testing Data In-Reply-To: <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> References: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: Comments: 1. I would change CMB-applications/Baseline and SMTK/baselines to baselines/cmbapplications baselines/smtk 2. Agreeing with Rob, it will be good to also create directories for files (ADHShallowWater.sbt, simple.stl, etc) under root level 3. SimBuilderGUI folder has FunctionExpressions.py and FunctionExpressions.sbt file, which is used by a test that's added in V3 with this commit a726d2c31d679bb2da62979e2e1dd52be66521df and disabled in cmb V4 with commit due to missing test data directory 959cf16ee5927f8ece7b9563e8476c0ab95d7f77 I will take a look at it to see if this test is still relevant. Yumin On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 09:08:39 -0400, Robert Maynard wrote: > > - Can we have consistent capitalization and plurality between the > > baseline folders ( CMB-Applications/Baseline && SMTK/baselines) > > FWIW, I'd prefer all-lowercase. > > --Ben > _______________________________________________ > Smtk-developers mailing list > Smtk-developers at smtk.org > http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/smtk-developers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From david.thompson at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 10:18:21 2016 From: david.thompson at kitware.com (David Thompson) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:18:21 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] Testing Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, > I?ve created a possible new organization for testing data - checkout my new-organization branch in my CMB Testing Data Repo > > Let me know what you think. 1. Thanks for switching to lowercase names. 2. Can we split solidModels into step, occ, iges, sat (if we have any), etc.? 3. I would argue the models in solidModels/problemModels should not be classified by whether they currently give us trouble or not... just by file type. Other classification information could go into a ReadMe (which we should probably put in each directory as we add files -- at a minimum to say where they came from). 4. The CMB files in MeshToModelMapping should move into filetype directories. 5. I would argue that directory names should not include "Files" (e.g., SimulationFiles => simulation, PolyFiles => poly, MapFiles => map, ...). 6. I agree with Yumin: there should be only a ReadMe and subdirectories at the top of the repo. My 2 cents, David From john.tourtellott at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 10:22:50 2016 From: john.tourtellott at kitware.com (John Tourtellott) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:22:50 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] [Smtk-developers] Testing Data In-Reply-To: <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> References: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: I was thinking of more hierarchy, maybe, for example Data BoreholeGeography GeoTiffs LIDAR MapFiles PointClouds PolyFiles Meshes 2D 3D Exodus Models CMBModels 2D 3D MeshToModelMapping SolidModels Scenes Also - - Let's find a home for all of the individual files at the top level, even if its an "etc" folder - SimBuilderGUI should go somewhere else, maybe in CMB ModelBuilder/Testing On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 09:08:39 -0400, Robert Maynard wrote: > > - Can we have consistent capitalization and plurality between the > > baseline folders ( CMB-Applications/Baseline && SMTK/baselines) > > FWIW, I'd prefer all-lowercase. > > --Ben > _______________________________________________ > Smtk-developers mailing list > Smtk-developers at smtk.org > http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/smtk-developers > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From david.thompson at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 10:32:47 2016 From: david.thompson at kitware.com (David Thompson) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:32:47 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] [Smtk-developers] Testing Data In-Reply-To: References: <20160629121040.GC5811@megas.kitware.com> <20160629131817.GE17842@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: <54700FA8-6E33-4749-A476-E1D80E9C000A@kitware.com> Hi John, > I was thinking of more hierarchy, maybe, for example > > Data > ... > Meshes > ... > Models > ... > Scenes Since there are files that could serve multiple purposes (a mesh can be a model, some models are meshes, a scene will eventually be a model, etc.) I don't see us being able to keep this organized. The only thing that seems unambiguous to me is the format that the file is stored in. However, I agree that the toplevel could include an additional level: data occ poly shape geotiff ... baselines smtk applications ... workflows (submodule @SHA) ReadMe.md David From ben.boeckel at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 11:30:39 2016 From: ben.boeckel at kitware.com (Ben Boeckel) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 11:30:39 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] [Smtk-developers] Testing Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20160629153039.GC4279@megas.kitware.com> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:18:21 -0400, David Thompson wrote: > 6. I agree with Yumin: there should be only a ReadMe and > subdirectories at the top of the repo. Do we have a license for this data? Creative Commons? --Ben From david.thompson at kitware.com Wed Jun 29 12:36:09 2016 From: david.thompson at kitware.com (David Thompson) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 12:36:09 -0400 Subject: [Cmb-users] [Smtk-developers] Testing Data In-Reply-To: <20160629153039.GC4279@megas.kitware.com> References: <20160629153039.GC4279@megas.kitware.com> Message-ID: <0C9DCD39-101B-438A-9819-F4E0CAB0BAF7@kitware.com> > >> 6. I agree with Yumin: there should be only a ReadMe and >> subdirectories at the top of the repo. > > Do we have a license for this data? Creative Commons? I doubt they are all under the same license as they are from many sources. That is why I suggested a ReadMe per directory. + The poly files like pmdc.poly are LGPL: https://people.sc.fsu.edu/~jburkardt/data/poly_3d/poly_3d.html + Some of the BRep (OpenCascade), IGES, and STEP models (the ones I added) are from CGM and licensed as it is (LGPL). I don't know about all of the others in solidModels. + The disk_out_ref.ex2 Exodus model is from Sandia and included in ParaView's test data. Whatever license there applies. + The pillbox netCDF model is from SLAC but is also distributed with ParaView (to test its SLAC reader). David