Skip to content

Mention precice/config-check on website #532

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 23, 2025

Conversation

Logende
Copy link
Member

@Logende Logende commented Jun 20, 2025

Not fully convinced whether this is the best place to put the reference to the student project, but also could not think of a better place.
In the near to mid future, we anyways want to re-structure the tooling some more and combine both precice checkers to be executed with the same command (If both are installed, otherwise only the installed one is executed and a message printed that another check exists too).

@Logende Logende requested review from MakisH and fsimonis June 20, 2025 09:56
@Logende
Copy link
Member Author

Logende commented Jun 20, 2025

This is connected to #531 (comment)

Copy link
Member

@MakisH MakisH left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The place is right, but you could also add it on https://precice.org/tooling-overview.html

This page will anyway need an extensive rewriting at some point, following precice/precice#2313.

Co-authored-by: Gerasimos Chourdakis <gerasimos.chourdakis@ipvs.uni-stuttgart.de>
@Logende
Copy link
Member Author

Logende commented Jun 23, 2025

The place is right, but you could also add it on https://precice.org/tooling-overview.html

This page will anyway need an extensive rewriting at some point, following precice/precice#2313.

I believe putting it on https://precice.org/tooling-overview.html could be confusing for users, as they might be familiar to precice check, but the other precice check one. In the near to mid future, we want to put both checks behind the same command, then it will also make sense to explain both within one documentation page. And until then, it should be sufficient to just mention the existence of the other checker, but in a way that does not create any confusion to the user.

@MakisH do you agree? Then I would merge this PR.

Copy link
Member

@MakisH MakisH left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, indeed, this page is already linked to from the tooling-overview, so this is fine as-is now. Good to go!

@Logende Logende merged commit 0f3d217 into master Jun 23, 2025
2 checks passed
@MakisH MakisH deleted the mention-precice-check-by-students branch June 23, 2025 09:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants