# OLS-5 Planning
### Suggested Aim:
What is the best way to use reproducible environments in collaborative research projects?
### Useful Links
- REG Handbook
- JupyterHub Docs
- OLS-5
#### Notes 01/02
- It would be worth talking to Jim to:
a) Get his opinions on reproducible environments, etc.
b) See how this project can fit in with the REG handbook (e.g, possibly write a chapter of the handbook as a project deliverable)
- We still need to speak to Evelina, but last time she suggested REG should have a "strongly opinionated" version of the Turing Way - this sounds similar to goal of REG handbook
- From Sarah:
```
Hey folks!
I am not sure if you are intending to resurrect this project with OLS-5 or
not (no pressure either way!). However, there’s a lot of movement at the minute
with a couple of new sub-projects:
- https://github.com/yuvipanda/github-app-user-auth
Facilitate securely pushing back to GitHub from a JupyterHub
- https://github.com/yuvipanda/jupyter-syncthing-proxy
Use syncthing to sync any folder to JupyterHub, theoretically this could mean a
user’s home directory is no longer dependent on the cluster/VM that’s hosting
the JupyterHub
Both of these things make me feel pretty confident that Hub23 the BinderHub should
be torn down, and Hub23 the JupyterHub should be deployed, with these extensions.
I think that would make the OLS project’s goal of “getting the Turing community
to use this kind of infrastructure for their research” a lot easier as these
are the kinds of things researchers will ask for but aren’t currently provided by
BinderHub.
I know you’re all pretty busy, but I’d love to have a scoping chat with
whoever’s interested, maybe sometime next month?
```
### Meeting Jim 22/02/22
- What are the barriers to open source at REG?
- A template for open science projects? Like a cookiecutter? Template could contain soft advocacy e.g. to binder.
- Chapter in REG handbook? how to bring open science to projects, what makes a good opportunity, what are red flags etc.
- does this link with hub23, if at all?
- even the initial scoping phase is a useful project.
- the reasons why we don't do open source well is because the persons that fund us (research) aren't incentivised for it (this is the same reasons that open science is a challenge). If we cannot circumvent these problems and get caught in the same trap then this is something that we need to look at. Perhaps we could have a more formal way of assessing 'openness' during the project scoping phase.
- hack week. formal top-down allocation is the only way to really get involved in open-source.
- Could we have two aims? Hub23 developement -> figure out how this is used in projects?
## Evelina meeting 25 February
- REG contribution to Open source vs Binder/Hub23 (reproducibility)
- pick one to focus on
- Community outreach + deliverable/proposal for REG handbook would be very useful, achievable, actionable
- e.g., project template
-