name: inverse layout: true class: middle --- background-image: url(https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/coderefinery/report@cfbb2f4e40a13f2a3f0b0786cc1fae888ed74f09/img/background.png) --- layout: false # CodeRefinery project mid-term report ## .blue[Part 1/3] - Motivation - Scope - Team ## .blue[Part 2/3] - Achievements - Challenges - Lessons learned ## .blue[Part 3/3] - Outlook - Recommendations --- class: split-60-40 ## Motivation: Better science with better software .column[
(c) The New Yorker, Oct 17, 2016 ] .column[ - Provide researchers with **infrastructure**, **training**, and **guides** in the necessary tools and techniques to create sustainable, modular, reusable, and reproducible software - Build **strong partnerships** with related initiatives ] --- .left-column[
] .right-column[ ## CodeRefinery launched September 2016 - Nordic e-Infrastructure Collaboration project - Funded for two years - We are a team of enthusiasts located in DK, FI, NO, SE ### Team - Bjørn Lindi, NO - Erik Edelmann, FI - Jyry Suvilehto, FI - Lukasz Bartosz Berger, DK - N. D., FI - Radovan Bast, NO - Risto Laurikainen, FI - Sabry Razick, NO - Sri Harsha Vathsavayi, FI - Thor Wikfeldt, SE ### Alumni - Pinja Koskinen, FI ] --- ## Steering group members - Gerd Behrmann, DK, Technical advisor - Hans A. Eide, NO - Lene Krøl Andersen, DK - Marti Louhivuori, FI - Michaela Barth, SE, Chair - Rossen Apostolov, SE ### Excellent input, busy, yet very responsive --- ## [Ten simple rules for making research software more robust](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005412) **M. Taschuk, G. Wilson** (2017). PLoS Comput Biol 13(4): e1005412. - Use **version control** - **Document** your code and usage - Make common operations easy to control - **Version** your releases - **Reuse** software (within reason) - Rely on **build tools** and package managers for installation - Do not require root or other special privileges to install or run - Eliminate hard-coded paths - Include a small **test set** that can be run to ensure the software is actually working - Produce identical results when given identical inputs --- class: split-40-60 ## Workshops and events .column[ - Dec 2016 - **Helsinki** - Feb 2017 - **Stockholm** - May 2017 - **Copenhagen** - May 2017 - Stockholm - May 2017 - Umeå - Jun 2017 - **Tromsø** - Sep 2017 - Manchester - Oct 2017 - Umeå - Oct 2017 - **Aarhus** - Nov 2017 - **Linköping** - Dec 2017 - **Helsinki** - Feb 2018 - **Trondheim** - Mar 2018 - **Turku** - Apr 2018 - **Odense** - May 2018 - **Uppsala** - Jun 2018 - **Oslo** - Aug 2018 - **Reykjavík** ] .column[
] --- template: inverse ## Part 2/3 ### - Achievements ### - Challenges ### - Lessons learned --- ## Workshops/events held - Dec 2016 - Helsinki (3-day workshop, 21 participants) - Feb 2017 - Stockholm (3-day workshop, 27 participants) - Apr 2017 - Oslo (1-day meetup, 10 participants) - May 2017 - Copenhagen (3-day workshop, 19 participants) - May 2017 - Stockholm (afternoon meetup, 20 participants) - May 2017 - Umeå (workshop at NeIC 2017, 10 participants) - Jun 2017 - Tromsø (3-day workshop, 20 participants) - Sep 2017 - Manchester (1.5 h workshop, 20 participants) ### Typical course website and schedule: http://coderefinery.org/workshops/2017-06-19-tromso/ - In less than 4 months after project start we have developed and deployed our first workshop. - Busy workshop schedule in the first half of the project period. - Project team has absorbed this pressure and delivered an excellent job. --- ## Lesson material - [Introduction to version control](https://coderefinery.github.io/git-intro/) - [Documentation](https://coderefinery.github.io/documentation/) - [Jupyter notebooks](https://github.com/coderefinery/jupyter) - [Collaborative distributed version control](https://coderefinery.github.io/git-collaborative/) - [Managing complexity and modular code development](http://cicero.xyz/v2/remark/github/bast/talk-complexity/master/talk.md/) - [Automated testing](https://coderefinery.github.io/testing/) - [DevOps, automation, and continuous integration](https://coderefinery.github.io/automation/) - [Building portable code with CMake](https://coderefinery.github.io/cmake/) - [Integrated development environments](https://coderefinery.github.io/IDEs/) - [Archaeology with Git](https://coderefinery.github.io/git-archaeology/) - [Git branch design](https://coderefinery.github.io/git-branch-design/) - [Mixed Martial Arts: Interfacing Fortran, C, C++, and Python](https://coderefinery.github.io/mma/) ### Suggestions for future topics - Contribution guides - How to open-source a project - Software licenses - Reproducible science - Modular code development --- ## Workshops ### What works well - We fill the rooms - Interactive hands-on lesson format - Most participants return second and third day - Feedback is very useful ### Lessons learned - Meet-ups are great for community building - *Only confuse people with one new idea at a time - make examples that illustrate only one new point.* [Joe Armstrong] - Room quality very important (two projectors) - **Local contact** for room reservation, email lists, catering, and practical questions is important --- ## Workshops ### What we need to improve - Challenge: disciplines are at different levels - Better include humanities - Even more clearly communicate prerequisites and workshop outcomes - Best practice guides in form of blogs - Information channels have varying penetration according to country or discipline - Decentralize paperwork and support requests --- ## Workshop feedback - We collect feedback after each lesson - *"Tell us one thing that was particularly good/useful but also one thing that we definitely need to improve".* - Explicit - Very useful for instructors - Difficult to visualize/communicate our feedback surveys ### Examples - [Espoo](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rSSe5CEm8piVrusXzyjUG0xeCAKh2rPbHthi7CKbk7o/) - [Stockholm](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Zc_P1CsW5ni0ubQQ2brD397qcRZmr32csWh8QoYcs_k/) - [Copenhagen](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vesWPNZIymNZxk7imoLGzekQtaCUZvQpCyOOYiZiKWY/) - [Tromsø](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Xn5cSRbvP618_FoFhEwIK9eZL6AMXs---A1x2xFo9gY/) ### What we need to improve - We have no metrics about how effective our workshops are for the time **after** the workshop - Solution: brief feedback form sent out 3-6 months after the workshop --- template: inverse ## Infrastructure services --- ## Git repository hosting for Nordic research software - Repository hosting - Collaboration - Code review - Issue tracking - Documentation
- http://coderefinery.org/repository/ - https://source.coderefinery.org - Temporary service is excellently maintained by CSC staff - Ansible playbooks are public: encourage other centers to contribute/reuse --- ## Metrics - Current: 54 projects, 50 users, 14 groups - Goal: 500-1000 users and projects ### Plans - Migrate service to DeIC infrastructure - Migrate users from https://source.uit.no (1249 projects, 187 public projects, 586 users, 61 groups) - Advertise service ### Risks - We migrate the service away from CSC staff - We migrate from a known solution to an unknown ### Opportunities - Long-term support --- ## Plan: Continuous integration service - [Travis CI](https://travis-ci.org), [GitLab CI](https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-ci/), [Jenkins](https://jenkins.io), [Drone](https://github.com/drone/drone), [AppVeyor](https://www.appveyor.com), ... - Test every changeset - We plan to deploy a service which will make it easier for researchers to test their code
--- ## Team and general observations ### What works well - Excellent team - Good team spirit - Team chat: we have good routines ### Lessons learned - Project website is important - Maximize transparency - Minimize tool-set - Google Drive works - Weekly video meetings with max. 60 minutes - Minimize communication overhead (both towards team and towards NeIC) with an efficient website --- ## Team and general observations ### Challenges - Team is generally .blue[not recruited from research groups] (advantage: new perspective and experience in programming, disadvantage: sometimes creates gap) - NeIC seems .blue[optimized for infrastructure services] but course development falls outside - .blue[Administrative overhead] for a relatively small project - Stakeholders and funding bodies like numbers and success stories but these can be difficult to quantify in workshops - We have team members with 25% or less involvement: tricky both for management and the team member - Team members have to report to partially .blue[disjoint stakeholders] - With all the firefighting that we have to do in many projects there is .blue[no time left to do long-term lesson development] --- ## Outreach and visibility ### Web - http://coderefinery.org - https://neic.no/coderefinery/ ### Twitter (79 followers) - [@coderefine](https://twitter.com/coderefine) ### GitHub (37 repositories) - [github.com/coderefinery](https://github.com/coderefinery) ### Mailing list (56 members, all opt-in) - [firstname.lastname@example.org](https://groups.google.com/group/coderefinery) ---
## CodeRefinery in the press - https://neic.no/news/2017/03/15/better-software-leads-to-better-science/ - https://www.deic.dk/news/2017-05-10/CodeRefinery - https://www.pdc.kth.se/news/news-repository/coderefinery-workshop-in-espoo - https://www.pdc.kth.se/newsletter/2017-1/pdc-newsletter-2017-no.-1 - https://csc.fi/de/web/blog/post/-/blogs/coderefinery-and-the-red-queen-s-race --- template: inverse ## Part 3/3 ### - Outlook ### - Recommendations --- ## Outlook - Courses are and will be needed - Courses need to be maintained to remain useful - Services will be needed and used but need to be better advertised - .blue[Users of services care most about long-term perspective] - Maintaining services is and probably will be cheap compared to salary costs --- ## Recommendations for follow-up project from PM - Support continuation of a GitLab service for 3 subsequent years and observe growth - Closer collaboration with Software Carpentry (fund a coordinator) - Transfer course maintenance to the community (to volunteers) - Recruit instructors from the .blue[research community] - Allocate .blue[administrative support] for the project for training coordination and reporting - Strike balance between discipline generality and discipline specificity to include humanities - Consider shifting budget from instructor salaries to instructor mobility - Consider more .blue[lightweight management structure] if the overall budget is small --- ## Recommendations and ideas from the steering group - Follow-up with longer term perspective is recommended but several possible paths exist: ### Lightweight path - .blue[Split into training part and infrastructure part]. - Updating workshops and developing a long-term operational plan for the services. ### Bigger picture path - Interlinking with other projects and provide a vision for software sharing interlinked with FAIR initiatives. - Nordic platform .blue[engaging in an European platform]. - Certification routines for trainers in all Nordic countries. - Establishing and strengthen the career paths of Research Software Engineers (RSEs). - Closer collaboration with use cases and follow them closer? - More discipline-specific targeted workshops + acting on requests. --- ## Recommendations from the steering group - The steering group sees a stronger need for teaching and courses compared to the services. - .blue[Teaching activity should be the core mission.] - Increased focus on train-the-trainers, maybe even with a certification to motivate people. - Increase the reach and scale with material that can be consumed online.