Hi Steve,
are we having a meeting today?
Cheers, Marco
Il giorno dom, 02/12/2018 alle 20.10 +0000, Constantinos Andreopoulos
ha scritto:
> Yes, it is trivial to re-release same code under different version
> (aka, the thing that, earlier in this thread, you thought would never
> have to happen). No one argued that it is not trivial. The argument
> is that it is not sane to do so and to have multiple releases of the
> exact same code. This has never been done *ever*, for any
> software.Just think of our communications with experiments:
> “Following the new Generator release, please make sure you update the
> ReWeight package!! Frankly, nothing changed, but it features our
> fancy new version number - the highest ever used in our GENIE
> ReWeighting product!!!”
> For reasons stated many times, it will be 1.0.0, or 50.0.0 if one
> prefers, but it will not track the Generator (especially since we
> have the expressed strategy of integrating ReWeight with Professor,
> in which case the ReWeight will be even more decoupled from the
> specifics of the Generator code, and it will hardly ever change). In
> addition, we can have a bug fix release (3.0.2) of a *non-existent*
> release (3.0.0).
> We will install checks within the ReWeight code, issue warnings and
> exit if we detect that a wrong version of the Generator is used, and
> we will maintain a table (along with all other tables that inform
> users about tunes etc).
>
> For the love of god, stop making up GENIE release strategy at the
> Fermilab canteen, and let’s stop arguing about this and focus on
> fixing the frigging problem. The solution put forward is almost
> certainly wrong. QE events are now generated using a model that
> provides a double-differential x-section, so we can no longer
> reweight based on calculating variations of dsig/dQ2 alone. We are
> nowhere near a ReWeight release I think. Not only that, we also
> *have* to issue a new bug fix release of 2.12, that is still the main
> release used by experiments.
>
> C
>
> --
> Dr. Costas Andreopoulos, FHEA
> Associate Professor
> University of Liverpool and STFC/RAL
> http://costas.andreopoulos.eu
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On 2 Dec 2018, at 18:19, Dytman, Steven A <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Steven, Robert, and I discussed strategy on Fri. He said it's
> > trivial to re-release the same code
> >
> > under a new version label in Git. My impression was that the old
> > release would disappear. He can
> >
> >
> > add his thoughts. We all firmly agree that 3.0.2 is best for 1st
> > ReWeight release for reasons
> >
> >
> > stated various times.
> >
> >
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/30/2018 10:58 AM, Constantinos Andreopoulos wrote:
> >
> >
> > > What gave me the idea that we will have to cut a new ReWeight
> > > release for each new Generator release?
> > > The clue was Robert mentioning it _explicitly_ :
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > That is, new tags of Generator would be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > accompanied by a new tag of Reweight to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ensure that an old Reweight isn't used with a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > new Generator (as that generally is a wrong
> > > > > > > > > > > > > thing to do). And Reweight would add a field
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to allow it to advance
> > > > > > > > > > > > > independently beyond the Generator that it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > relies on, while still indicating which
> > > > > > > > > > > > > version it is.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > cheers
> > > C
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 30 Nov 2018, at 15:43, Dytman, Steven A <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ok, 1.0.0
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Where did you get idea of need to cut new identical Reweight
> > > > releases?
> > > >
> > > > That was never proposed. What was proposed was an attempt to
> > > > start
> > > >
> > > > releases with ReWeight and Generator together for each major
> > > > release.
> > > >
> > > > We are a little behind, so that means 3.0.2 now, will next be
> > > > 4.0.0.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > BTW, we see a few mismatches between ReWeighting and new tune
> > > >
> > > > structure that will be addressed in next few months.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > my ideas of democracy come from Thomas Jefferson and 40 years
> > > > of
> > > >
> > > > work in particle physics. Trading insults is
> > > > counterproductive.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 11/30/2018 9:33 AM, Constantinos Andreopoulos wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Absolutely does not worth the argument - It is 1.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Generator and ReWeight are connected but _different_ products
> > > > > with _different_ releases.
> > > > > We will not nullify the benefits of this separation by having
> > > > > a scheme where we always tag both of them together.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It is likely that we will _not_ have to issue another
> > > > > ReWeight release till we get to GENIE4 in ~Q1/2020.
> > > > > Over that time, we may have ~5 or so minor Generator
> > > > > releases, each with as many as ~10 revisions.
> > > > > It is insane to create 50 tags of the exact same ReWeight
> > > > > code.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Democracy? Who gave you this idea? Trump or Brexit?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > C
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 30 Nov 2018, at 15:08, Dytman, Steven A <[log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this is frustrating for those of us who are anxious to meet
> > > > > > Nova and MicroBooNE deadline of Dec 1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > People I talk to have strong desire for 3.0.2, I guess you
> > > > > > disagree and democratic principles are not applicable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As Gabe says, problems won't be at FNAL. I worry about
> > > > > > other users when reweighting and generator
> > > > > >
> > > > > > numbering have little relationship.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is not worth continued argument. What do you
> > > > > > recommend? 1.0.0?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We expect to be done with code today. Recent work is on
> > > > > > branch newrew.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Steve
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/29/2018 01:02 PM, Constantinos Andreopoulos wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > No, we did not agree on 3.0.2. In fact, I recall
> > > > > > > disagreeing strongly. See the thread below if you do not
> > > > > > > recall.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This needs to be sorted before tagging the first one. If
> > > > > > > we do not require the same version number in all products
> > > > > > > (and there was no overriding argument as to why having
> > > > > > > identical versions might be necessary) there is no
> > > > > > > reason to name it 3.0.2. It could be 1.0.0.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > C
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dr. Costas Andreopoulos,
> > > > > > > FHEA
> > > > > > > Associate Professor
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > University of Liverpool and STFC/RAL
> > > > > > > http://costas.andreopoulos.eu
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 29 Nov 2018, at 16:39, Dytman, Steven A <
> > > > > > > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No consensus obvious to me. I think we are all agreed
> > > > > > > > that new ReWeight release
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > will be 3.0.2, still need to sort out what happens
> > > > > > > > after that.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 11/28/2018 05:34 PM, Gabriel Nathan Perdue wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Also, at Fermilab we can use UPS to ensure ReWeight
> > > > > > > > > and Generator compatibility, no? We have two kinds of
> > > > > > > > > GENIE clients - experiments and model developers. We
> > > > > > > > > should be able to manage the complexity for
> > > > > > > > > experiments through tools like UPS. Model developers
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > a hardy bunch and can be asked to check a table. Of
> > > > > > > > > course, that means we should provide a table
> > > > > > > > > somewhere of recommended versions of ReWeight for a
> > > > > > > > > given version of the Generator, and vice versa.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gabriel Perdue
> > > > > > > > > Scientist
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Quantum Science
> > > > > > > > > Office of the CRO
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
> > > > > > > > > PO Box 500, MS 234, Batavia, IL 60510, USA
> > > > > > > > > [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > > > Office: 630-840-6499
> > > > > > > > > Cell: 630-605-8062
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Connect with us!
> > > > > > > > > Web | Facebook | Twitter
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2018, at 3:50 PM, Constantinos
> > > > > > > > > > Andreopoulos <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If we are scared that things will go terribly
> > > > > > > > > > wrong, it is trivial to make sure it never happens!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We can guarantee that a version of ReWeight runs
> > > > > > > > > > with a specific version of the Generator only. The
> > > > > > > > > > Generator version is available within the ReWeight
> > > > > > > > > > initialisation, so ReWeight can exit if it thinks
> > > > > > > > > > it is incompatible with the version of the
> > > > > > > > > > Generator.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Software interdependencies are complex and matching
> > > > > > > > > > version numbers for 2 products in particular is
> > > > > > > > > > doing nothing much. What if our predictions start
> > > > > > > > > > to depend critically upon the version of PYTHIA
> > > > > > > > > > used so that our tunes and reweights do depend
> > > > > > > > > > on a specific version of PYTHIA? Do we throw the
> > > > > > > > > > PYTHIA version number in the mix too?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Now, move forward to the distant time that all
> > > > > > > > > > products (Comparisons, Tuning) might also be
> > > > > > > > > > public. Do we
> > > > > > > > > > tag Tuning with the versions of all Generator,
> > > > > > > > > > Reweight and Comparisons because
> > > > > > > > > > it depends on all of them?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Matching version numbers is extremely monolithic
> > > > > > > > > > and non scalable. It only works with 2 products and
> > > > > > > > > > we already
> > > > > > > > > > a) had to add a 4th number in, while
> > > > > > > > > > b) we reduce the independent Reweight version
> > > > > > > > > > numbers to only 1.
> > > > > > > > > > So, no matter whether you change an x to a y, or
> > > > > > > > > > you completely rewrite the whole thing (for a given
> > > > > > > > > > generator version), the ReWeight version is bumped
> > > > > > > > > > up by the same amount and there is nothing in the
> > > > > > > > > > version number to indicate the scope of changes.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I think the proposal will eventually turn
> > > > > > > > > > out to be unworkable for one reason or another.
> > > > > > > > > > Like a bike with square wheels. A scheme with
> > > > > > > > > > Independent version numbers (bumped up in a sane
> > > > > > > > > > manner, as expected with most other codes), a table
> > > > > > > > > > to indicate allowed
> > > > > > > > > > or desired dependencies , and run-time checks if
> > > > > > > > > > we are too worried, is both the simplest scheme and
> > > > > > > > > > imposes no constraint whatsoever.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If only our OS package manager was working out
> > > > > > > > > > interdependencies requiring common version numbers.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > cheers
> > > > > > > > > > C
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dr. Costas Andreopoulos,
> > > > > > > > > > FHEA
> > > > > > > > > > Associate Professor
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > University of Liverpool and STFC/RAL
> > > > > > > > > > http://costas.andreopoulos.eu
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 28 Nov 2018, at 18:08, Robert W Hatcher <
> > > > > > > > > > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2018, at 11:43 AM, Constantinos
> > > > > > > > > > > > Andreopoulos <[log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > 4 numbers? With a new number enumerating new
> > > > > > > > > > > > features appended after the revision?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > New features or bug fixes to Reweight
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Generator remains having only 3 fields
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > So basically a numbering scheme like
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > [(major features) - (minor features) - (bug fix
> > > > > > > > > > > > vrs on previous set of features)] - (yet more
> > > > > > > > > > > > features??)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The 4th seems out of place.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > No, this is the first I am hearing about this
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Well, I distinctly remember a discussion w/
> > > > > > > > > > > Marco, and I thought you were online at the time.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think of this scheme for Reweight as
> > > > > > > > > > > {GeneratorVersion}_{ReweightSubVersion}.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If you don't like {GeneratorVersion}_{pkgVersion}
> > > > > > > > > > > how about {GeneratorVerson} for the first
> > > > > > > > > > > compatible Reweight, and followed by
> > > > > > > > > > > {GeneratorVersion}A, {GeneratorVersion}B ...
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Whether it's adopted for Comparisons or Tuning
> > > > > > > > > > > doesn't matter to me at all. Run those
> > > > > > > > > > > independently if one likes, because experts will
> > > > > > > > > > > know which can be used with which. But for
> > > > > > > > > > > public-facing bits such as Reweight we
> > > > > > > > > > > must make sure that it is easy and memorable for
> > > > > > > > > > > users to get it right. This rule for Reweight
> > > > > > > > > > > is the first three fields must match the
> > > > > > > > > > > Generator used, while for the last one generally
> > > > > > > > > > > wants the largest value available.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Tagging a new Reweight for every new Generator
> > > > > > > > > > > ensures that one is coupling any config changes
> > > > > > > > > > > with any possible Reweight changes. But the
> > > > > > > > > > > extension allows for Reweight-only changes to
> > > > > > > > > > > move ahead.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -robert
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > C
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Costas Andreopoulos,
> > > > > > > > > > > > FHEA
> > > > > > > > > > > > Associate Professor
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > University of Liverpool and STFC/RAL
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://costas.andreopoulos.eu
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 28 Nov 2018, at 17:37, Robert W Hatcher <
> > > > > > > > > > > > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2018, at 11:17 AM, Dytman, Steven
> > > > > > > > > > > > > A <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > see below
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/28/2018 11:03 AM, Constantinos
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreopoulos wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, not sure ReWeight should be tagged
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as 3.0.2. Keeping the Generator and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ReWeight version numbers the same, is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as great idea as it might look. What if
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we find a bug and need to produce a new
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ReWeight version? Do we also produce a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > clone Generator release
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with a new tag, only so that we can keep
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tag numbers in sync? Do not like the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > potential proliferation of tags, without
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it being warranted by code changes, only
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so that all products can be kept in sync.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What if we consider Comparisons and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuning too? Do we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > keep everything in sync, tagging all 4
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > products together? Or do we introduce
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > variations to the numbering scheme
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (3.0.2a etc)? Isn’t 3 numbers just enough
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > info for organising releases? What is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong with a simple table associating
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supported combinations of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > products.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > for now, why not use same number for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ReWeight and Generator? Tuning and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Comparisons are 3.0.0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > so we are close together. As you say,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > divergences will develop over time. I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > don't think we want to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > synch all 4 products. If we have new major
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > releases about once a year, we will usually
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > be close. I'd
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > like to hear more opinions.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. I thought we discussed this before and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > agreed on the idea:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Generator
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Reweight
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_00
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_02
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_02 (or R-3_00_02_00?)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_02_02
> > > > > > > > > > > > > # new features of reweighting
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_02_04
> > > > > > > > > > > > > # yet more
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_04
> > > > > > > > > > > > > R-3_00_04 (or R-3_00_04_00)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > That is, new tags of Generator would be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > accompanied by a new tag of Reweight to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ensure that an old Reweight isn't used with a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > new Generator (as that generally is a wrong
> > > > > > > > > > > > > thing to do). And Reweight would add a field
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to allow it to advance independently beyond
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the Generator that it relies on, while still
> > > > > > > > > > > > > indicating which version it is.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I really, really don't think we want them to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > run independently and rely on people
> > > > > > > > > > > > > consulting some lookup table ... that sounds
> > > > > > > > > > > > > like asking for trouble.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > -robert
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The goal with the document is that it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > precedes the release. Not knowing whether
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > more commits will follow today does not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sound like a robust starting point for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deciding that we have a release tomorrow?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are there residual problems or not?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm being careful. We think we have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > reweighting working. Steven made a script
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > to test all
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > reweighting tweaks in all tunes and that
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > shows no errors. Robert is renaming
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > splines to match
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > new names today. I found a potential error
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > yesterday that we are still investigating.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > as much as I know.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Costas Andreopoulos,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FHEA
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Associate Professor
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > University of Liverpool and STFC/RAL
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://costas.andreopoulos.eu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28 Nov 2018, at 16:40, Dytman, Steven
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Generator release will be 3.0.2, not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sure about ReWeight release.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We should keep numbering similar, how
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > about also using 3.0.2?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/28/2018 10:26 AM, Steven Dytman
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Robert, Steven G, and I have been
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > making small changes to Generator
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and ReWeight.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some commits have already been made,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > perhaps more today. Our goal is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > new release tomorrow.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will put together a small document
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and post it to docdb.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/26/2018 10:27 AM, Costas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreopoulos - UKRI STFC wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Same as always? Guess we are
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > talking strictly about a bug-fix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > revision of the Generator (3.0.2)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or the first tag of ReWeight
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (effectively, a bug-fix revision of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what we would have already
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > released in October had it still
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > been part of the Generator).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, some documentation of the bug
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fixes (eg a DocDB document, or info
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > submitted together with a pull
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > request - whatever is most
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > given the scale and scope of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > changes) + some validation showing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bug was fixed and nothing else was
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > screwed by mistake. Then we can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take it from there.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 26 Nov 2018, at 16:03, Dytman,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steven A <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok, we have important deadline
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > very soon. What is procedure for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > agreeing
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on a release?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/26/2018 10:40 AM, Costas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreopoulos - UKRI STFC wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can not connect on Wedns. I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > am teaching and then I am
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > travelling
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to IFIC.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 26 Nov 2018, at 14:12,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dytman, Steven A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > excellent idea, is that all
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > right with you, Costas?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/26/2018 7:54 AM, Marco
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Roda wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Steve,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok, no problem.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe we could use the time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > slot we had this summer for the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tuning: it
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was Wednesday at 10 am Chicago
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > time.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marco
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Il giorno lun, 26/11/2018 alle
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 13.41 +0000, Dytman, Steven A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ha
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scritto:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a significant snow
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > storm in the Chicago area, not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > sure what
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to do.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Researchers here coming back
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from elsewhere surely have lots
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trouble
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yesterday and today. Those of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > us here have up to 1 ft=30 cm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of snow.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Meeting is postponed, but we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > still have to decide when we
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are done
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > changes to reweighting. I'm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thinking midweek, we'll have to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > stay in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > touch
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > via email & slack. Steven and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I are still doing tests and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Robert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supposed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to have info on splines early
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this week.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ###############################
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ###############################
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #######
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ###
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the following
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jiscmail.ac.uk%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwebadmin%3FSUBED1%3DNEUTRINO-MC-CORE%26A%3D1&data=02%7C01%7Cdytman%40pitt.edu%7C892f14d4573c4dcd1c5c08d653bc2048%7C9ef9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1%7C0%7C636788464802973660&sdata=gCZNprjdR5tPIivPrWxqr%2F%2FydwuTaMBbyubd7zreA4I%3D&reserved=0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ###############################
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ###############################
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ##########
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the following
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jiscmail.ac.uk%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwebadmin%3FSUBED1%3DNEUTRINO-MC-CORE%26A%3D1&data=02%7C01%7Cdytman%40pitt.edu%7C892f14d4573c4dcd1c5c08d653bc2048%7C9ef9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1%7C0%7C636788464802973660&sdata=gCZNprjdR5tPIivPrWxqr%2F%2FydwuTaMBbyubd7zreA4I%3D&reserved=0
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #######################################
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #################################
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CORE list, click the following link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > list, click the following link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE
> > > > > > > > > > > > > list, click the following link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list,
> > > > > > > > > > click the following link:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click
> > > > > > > > > the following link:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click
> > > > > > > > the following link:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the
> > > > > > following link:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the
> > > > following link:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following
> link:
>
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
>
--
Marco Roda, PhD in Physics
Post Doctorate Research Associate
University of Liverpool
Department of Physics
Oliver Lodge Laboratory
Liverpool L69 7ZE, UK
Mail: [log in to unmask]
Office: +44 (0)151 79 43403
Mobile: +44 (0)745 381 2081
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
