[open-science] github/R stack for the nomadic researcher

Wed Apr 11 06:45:20 UTC 2012

do people think a separate instance of ckan would be useful for the open
data/science community at large? or is it an issue of marketing what we
have (thedatahub) better?

if the former, i'm happy to help w system administration, but it's not
obvious to me... curious what others think!

jessy

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Mark Wainwright
<mark.wainwright at okfn.org>wrote:

> Yes indeed! Perhaps I could mention this submission that I threw
> together for the Open Repositories conference OR12
> (http://or2012.ed.ac.uk):
>
> http://ckan.okfnpad.org/or12
>
> My idea was that we could boot a new instance of ckan specialised for
> research papers (slightly facetiously called thepaperhub.org), but I
> don't know how easy this is, or whether there would be enthusiasm from
> someone technically literate to keep it running. (Volunteers?)
> Meantime thedatahub.org is a good option.
>
> I gather OR12 will be accepting/rejecting submissions on 16 April,
> incidentally.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 2 April 2012 20:01, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Jessy Kate Schingler <
> jessy at jessykate.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> i agree on the dataforge front...  git doesn't handle large files well,
> >> and figshare, buzzdata etc. seem to be mostly for visual or tabular data
> >> sets. out of curiosity, as i'm starting to learn about thedatahub.com,
> >
> >
> > thedatahub.org I think
> >
> >>
> >> it seems rather perfect for data set management, and even has a change
> >> lists for data sets, groups, user pages, etc. (especially if there were
> some
> >> command line tools so i could "commit" changes to my data set
> periodically
> >> and upload them :)).
> >>
> >> is there a reason people find ckan/thedatahub insufficient for data
> >> management needs? is it related to technical/features, or to peoples'
> >> familiarity and confidence around the longevity of the site?
> >
> >
> > It's history, I think. We should now be making the case for such a
> > repository and I don't think Figshare is it. I have rather negelected
> > datahub because the original CKAN was metadata-oriented.
> >
> > I'll be making the case in Europe next week that we badly need informal
> > repositories and maybe this is the time to push the datahub?
> >
> > P.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Tom,
> >>> This is a really valuable post. I feel your concerns directly. I have
> >>> copied in our new Panton fellows (though I am sure they read this list
> >>> anyway!)
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche at pobox.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> [apologies for length of post, but it's a big topic]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> No apologies needed!
> >>>
> >>> I am giving an important presentation to  Europe "Open Infrastructures
> >>> for Open Science" and Neelie Kroes and others will be there. I am
> getting my
> >>> thoughts together as I have to give the plenary that informs the rest
> of the
> >>> workshop. Currently my thoughts are:
> >>>
> >>> Europe (and the world) is losing 10 billion + in unused and restricted
> >>> data. (I said this to Hargreaves)
> >>> We MUST have easily accessible research repositories, probably on a
> >>> domain basis (Dryad, Pangaea, TARDIS, etc.)
> >>> Institutional Repos do not work for STM and never will
> >>> Mandates are a blunt weapon and so far have little effectiveness
> >>> Non-Commercial destroys knowledge
> >>>
> >>> We must give the researchers something they want. Sourceforge does this
> >>> for code. I use Sourceforge (actually now Bitbucket and Github) several
> >>> times a day. All my code is backed up, shareable, reusable, validated
> etc.
> >>>
> >>> There must be a "Data forge" for Europe. Figshare was built by one
> >>> graduate student in one year. I would give 3rd year graduate students
> >>> funding to do this - it's a hundred times more cost effective than
> >>> repositories.
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to collect ideas on this llist and present them next week
> >>> (11th). An OKF data manifesto for Open Science (in Europe) Who knows
> what
> >>> might come?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Peter Murray-Rust
> >>> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> >>> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> >>> University of Cambridge
> >>> CB2 1EW, UK
> >>> +44-1223-763069
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> open-science mailing list
> >>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> >>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jessy
> >> http://jessykate.com
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Peter Murray-Rust
> > Reader in Molecular Informatics
> > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> > University of Cambridge
> > CB2 1EW, UK
> > +44-1223-763069
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > open-science mailing list
> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Wainwright, CKAN Community Co-ordinator
> Open Knowledge Foundation http://okfn.org/
> Skype: m.wainwright
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>

-- 
Jessy
http://jessykate.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20120410/053dee5d/attachment-0001.html>