workshop-template

workshop-template copied to clipboard

The instructions say to run the python scripts from a shell, but there's no indication of how to open it on different operating systems.

I suggest:

• For Mac/Linux, tell them to open the program called "Terminal"
• For Windows users, tell them to open a program called "Git Bash"

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 08:52:20AM -0800, Sean Aubin wrote:

• For Mac/Linux, tell them to open the program called "Terminal"

Gentoo doesn't come with a program called “Terminal” :p. To keep a suggestion like this maintainable, I recommend we list options for specific distributions. Then when Fedora (or whoever) changes the name/location we can fix their entry.

I think “how to open a terminal” is generic enough SWC information that I'd consider putting it in its own repository and linking from this repo to https://swcarpentry.github.io/open-a-terminal/ or some such.

I think “how to open a terminal” is generic enough SWC information that I'd consider putting it in its own repository and linking from this repo to https://swcarpentry.github.io/open-a-terminal/ or some such.

That's a great idea!

I was going to file an issue on exactly the same problem - but luckily don't have too - as I just got a learners email saying:

Thank you for the information! I have downloaded everything, and it seems to have worked out ok. But unfortunately, since I have zero knowledge of programming, I don’t know how to run the checking scripts - specifically, I don’t understand «run it from the shell».

To which I replied

Hehe, «run it from the shell» is exactly what we are going to teach you :-)

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 04:20:49AM -0800, Lex Nederbragt wrote:

… specifically, I don’t understand «run it from the shell».

To which I replied

Hehe, «run it from the shell» is exactly what we are going to teach you :-)

Yeah, there's certainly a bit of a chicken/egg problem here. But I expect there are learners who:

a. already know how to get to a terminal, b. could figure it out using a website with screenshots, and c. will need a helper looking over their shoulder and guiding their path (ideally in pre-workshop office-hours).

I don't think the presence of (a) and (c) means that we shouldn't have a site with docs to help (b), but I don't have a good handle on the sizes of the groups. Maybe food for our workshop assessment (I think I remember shell questions the last time I saw that survey?), distinguishing between (b) and (c) in a self-reported pre-test survey would be difficult. Maybe we want a pre-workshop, post-setup survey to ask how things went?

Is it at all possible to turn these scripts into some executable, i.e. 'download this file and double click it'? I am no expert, so there may be lot's of cross-platform or security issues that make this impractical...

If we leave this as instructions to run the programs from the terminal we should suggest that they may need to try the command using a path that starts with : Downloads/

Many people are don't know to navigate to the directory with the scripts.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:35:00AM -0800, Lex Nederbragt wrote:

Is it at all possible to turn these scripts into some executable…

Sort of, see [1,2]. This would be more feasible with wking/swc-setup-installation-test#9, since then you wouldn't have to rebuild the checker after adjusting it to match your workshop. But a number of the checks are for “does $COMMAND resolve in your terminal”, and for systems like Windows where you are more likely to have a number of different shells with a number of different PATHs, it would be hard for an executable installer to figure out what PATH it should use for testing (e.g. should it look for and parse ~/.bash_profile 3?). So while you might be able to put in a lot of work and get something that mostly works, I think folks who really struggle getting a terminal open should just wait until the workshop / pre-workshop help sessions.

Then what if we describe it that way?

"If you are already comfortable with the command line or would like to try your hand at it before the workshop, run this command from the command line...

Otherwise SWC Instructors can help you run these checks at the start of the workshop."

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 01:00:09PM -0800, Jennifer M Shelton wrote:

Then what if we describe it that way?

"If you are already comfortable with the command line or would like to try your hand at it before the workshop, run this command from the command line...

Otherwise SWC Instructors can help you run these checks at the start of the workshop."

That misses group (b) from 1, but I agree that we want wording pointing out that it's ok to just show up at the workshop without running the checks. In the absence of https://swcarpentry.github.io/open-a-terminal/ or some such, your wording makes sense. Maybe file a PR against setup/index.md mentioning that folks are welcome to skip the checks if they have trouble running them? Then we can add a link to a terminal-opening tutorial if/when such a tutorial materializes.

I just don't think we should be embedding the terminal-opening tutorial in this repository.

In the absence of https://swcarpentry.github.io/open-a-terminal/ or some such, your wording makes sense.

I really liked @wking's idea of having a lesson on just how to open a terminal. So what about something like this: https://github.com/iglpdc/open-a-terminal

Nice... But opening a terminal fixes the first part. Learners then have to fetch the script and execute it. And if their python installation didn't work, they can't even do that... So I think I agree more to a wording in setup/index.md as @wking suggested.

On 08.02.2016 09:31, Lex Nederbragt wrote:

Nice... But opening a terminal fixes the first part. Learners then have to fetch the script and execute it. And if their python installation didn't work, they can't even do that... So I think I agree more to a wording in setup/index.md as @wking https://github.com/wking suggested.

On this note: I had set up this script for my last workshop, without thinking of the fact that it was R focused. Thus, many of my participants couldn't get it to run because they didn't have python installed.

Karin

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 08:46:08AM -0800, karinlag wrote:

On this note: I had set up this script for my last workshop, without thinking of the fact that it was R focused. Thus, many of my participants couldn't get it to run because they didn't have python installed.

Previous discussion on that point starting here 1.

Anyone want to PR this?

I really liked @wking's idea of having a lesson on just how to open a terminal. So what about something like this: https://github.com/iglpdc/open-a-terminal

Yes, I did: see this comment above. The thing never took off, but I think it'd be great to have something like this and use it as a reference any time we need to show how to open terminal.

I think it'd be better in a separate repo rather than included here, but put everything together is an option too.

@iglpdc could you please mail the maintainers' list and ask people to comment on this issue so that we can come to a conclusion?

+1 to have it move under https://github.com/swcarpentry/

MOTION: Adopt https://github.com/iglpdc/open-a-terminal as official Software Carpentry lesson.

Counter-motion: this lesson (once complete) becomes part of the unix shell lesson. For example, as part of http://swcarpentry.github.io/shell-novice/setup/.

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 12:27:23AM -0800, Lex Nederbragt wrote:

Counter-motion: this lesson (once complete) becomes part of the unix shell lesson. For example, as part of http://swcarpentry.github.io/shell-novice/setup/.

I'd rather keep it separate, because opening a terminal can be useful even for folks who aren't working through the whole shell-novice lesson. And notes on opening a terminal are going to be very broad (many platforms) and shallow (not much to it on a given platform), so you'll want to lay it out differently than the narrow/deep shell-novice lesson (where everyone is following the same track through a hefty chunk of material).

@wking good points. I agree that having a separate place for this information in the SWC web-infrastructure would be a good thing. But would a full-fledged lesson just for explaining how to open a terminal be the right solution?

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 01:10:25AM -0800, Lex Nederbragt wrote:

But would a full-fledged lesson just for explaining how to open a terminal be the right solution?

I'm fine with micro-lessons ;). But I don't have a strong opinion on this; if the maintainer(s) (@iglpdc?) want to structure the “how to open a terminal” information differently, that's fine with me.