# 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 -