--- name: DIALS core meeting 2021-09-09 tags: core meeting --- # DIALS core meeting 2021-09-09 [![hackmd-github-sync-badge](https://hackmd.io/1_xXLiYxRjmgncHGRwwg5g/badge)](https://hackmd.io/1_xXLiYxRjmgncHGRwwg5g) [Previous meeting: [2021-08-26](https://dials.github.io/kb/core/20210826)] ## Previous Actions * [ ] ND: conda-forge pycbf: Make new release to use dials-data directly for tests - [ ] "Contiguous Nexus" [`cctbx/dxtbx#356`](https://github.com/cctbx/dxtbx/pull/356) - [ ] Non-draft state is pending checks against issues @dwpaley raised, and checking for non-contiguous cases [[prev](https://dials.github.io/kb/core/20210715#contiguous-nexus-pr)] - [ ] dxtbx `src/` layout [[prev](https://dials.github.io/kb/core/20210715#src-layout-for-dxtbx)] - [ ] Nick: Ask cctbxbb if anyone has knowledge or experience of re-export of dispatchers on windows - [ ] This is a higher priority now - David feeling pain of missing - [ ] Removal of DataBlock [[prev](https://dials.github.io/kb/core/20210826#removal-of-datablock)] - [ ] Make a longer-term DC for migration over ~6 month period - [ ] Used in tests, documentation - [ ] Possibly heavily used by 2020 LS49 paper - [X] CCTBX Occasional failure of mirror job - [X] [`cctbx/cctbx_project#646`](https://github.com/cctbx/cctbx_project/pull/646) - [X] DIALS: Remove old environment conda files: [`dials/dials#1865`](https://github.com/dials/dials/pull/1865) - DXTBX/pycbf [[prev](https://dials.github.io/kb/core/20210826#cbflib-conda-forge-packagepycbf)] - Outstanding: [`dxtbx#368`](https://github.com/cctbx/dxtbx/pull/368) for optional cbflib/_adaptbx . * [ ] Last status: one `labelit`/`labelit_regression` test still doesn't pass * All except one labelit tests are now working. On NKS todo list to fix. * Progress on CBFlib 0.9.7? ## Agenda ### Datablock - Graeme asks how hard to remove and whether we should just allocate a block of time - (Possibly heavily used by 2020 LS49 paper) - Dan thinks that it's described more than used - Discussion on approach of doing this work - More visible deprecationwarning - Impact assessment and see who/what code is affected - Actual removal probably not too difficult ### Nonconventional P1 indexing - [`dials/dials#1878`](https://github.com/dials/dials/issues/1878) - XFail test in [`dials/dials@9b4369`](https://github.com/dials/dials/commit/9b436918a175995b4c857040da94ed26ac94007d) - GW: Perhaps we need to take what the user gives us, map into standard setting and remember that reindex so that it can invert the reindexing at the end - DW: Has encountered this problem, needs to manually reindex back to the setting that he wanted - GW: Another example of comparing unit cells in a setting that is more convenient for comparisons - Discussion over, _should_ we do this - an argument for always returning in standard setting and relying on user to transform it back if they _really_ want that - Discussion seems to be concluding that returning in user-specified order probably makes sense - Not doing so has XFEL gui repercussions - It already effectively does this for non-P1 cells - **Action:** Richard going to have a look to see how hard this is to do ### ~~dxtbx~~ `src/` layout - dxtbx and xia2 were both fixed for read-only install - xia also had the offline issue - Fixed in [`xia2/xia2@a809cd`](https://github.com/xia2/xia2/commit/a809cd22642e63838e2c4f039f9883f15d8e14d6) - Deployed in DIALS 3.6.1 ### Deterministic Experiment Identifiers - PR: [`dials/dials#1864`](https://github.com/dials/dials/pull/1864) - GW: It would be useful to describe the problem that is trying to be solved - ND: (again) bring up - would a general metadata field that can have an `ast.literal_eval` dictionary embedded solve this problem? - DP: Yes, this would seem to solve the issue - Matching up multiple lattices based on image/lattice count - Is this reproduceable - getting the same N lattices doesn't mean that they are in the same order - GitHub discussion possibly worthwhile for both of these ### Next meeting Thursday, September 23rd, 4pm UK (BST), 8am PDT.