[AstroPy] Proliferating py-astro-libs

[Erik Bray]

On 06/14/2011 11:20 AM, Erik Tollerud wrote:
> Personally, I'm rather strongly inclined against SciPy given that I
> (and I suspect others who might attend) wouldn't be able to re-arrange
> travel this quickly. I would think AAS might be a bit better given
> that many people might be there anyway, although it might be easier to
> run if it's a separate workshop... But the best thing to do is to
> simply get a vote by interested parties as to which they might be able
> to attend.

Where SciPy is concerned I would definitely suggest an informal meeting 
for anyone interested in this.  I've never been to SciPy before, but I 
image there's BoF board or something of the like?

But I agree that it's too soon for more comprehensive meeting.

Erik


> Are there any options other than the 4 I've listed above?  If not,
> then Thomas, perhaps you can pot a poll on the wikispaces site for
> which is the preferred option (wikispaces has a surveymonkey widget
> you can embed into the page)?
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Perry Greenfield<perry at stsci.edu>  wrote:
>> I think we could probably host as well (I have to check the
>> logistics). Fall is probably good for us as well but we could probably
>> do it earlier if there was interest in doing it sooner than fall.
>>
>> Perry
>>
>> On Jun 13, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Thomas Robitaille wrote:
>>
>>> Just to put the suggestion out there, Tom A. and I would be happy to
>>> try and host the meeting at CfA if there was interest for this,
>>> preferably in the fall. We have webcast capabilities for the talks
>>> (I like the idea of 'lightning' talks), though it would be harder to
>>> have remote participation for the hands-on part.
>>>
>>> Of course, we're also open to other locations, so if anyone else
>>> interested in hosting this, please feel free to suggest!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> On Monday, June 13, 2011 at 4:53 PM, James Turner wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I agree with the idea of a workshop! (but with few talks, and
>>>>> discussing/deciding/planning/coding would be the majority). I think
>>>>> face to face would be much better than teleconference. I also like
>>>>> the idea of a dedicated workshop, not a splinter.
>>>>
>>>> We could do both (a face-to-face workshop with video connections or
>>>> whatever to whomever else wants to dial in; I wouldn't want to shut
>>>> out students or people in far-flung continents).
>>>>
>>>> I agree that we'd keep the talks brief, just for context (1 day?)
>>>> and focus on things like how to contribute, actually doing so and
>>>> organization.
>>>>
>>>>> I suggest that those of us interested in a small workshop see what
>>>>> would be possible in our own institutions. I think in the end we
>>>>> should keep this focused on the development (rather than a general
>>>>> python in astronomy conference). Keeping it small will also make it
>>>>> easier to organize and manage.
>>>>
>>>> Chile would be nice but is probably a bit too far for people(?). As
>>>> someone pointed out, Baltimore and Harvard seem relatively accessible
>>>> for people from the US and Europe.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> James.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AstroPy mailing list
>>> AstroPy at scipy.org
>>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/astropy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AstroPy mailing list
>> AstroPy at scipy.org
>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/astropy
>>
>
>
>