Skip to content

Commit 6f00874

Browse files
richelbilderbeekrichelbilderbeek
committed
Add meeting notes
1 parent c548821 commit 6f00874

1 file changed

Lines changed: 196 additions & 0 deletions

File tree

‎meeting_notes/20250522.md‎

Lines changed: 196 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,196 @@
1+
# Planning HPC Python at HPC2N and UPPMAX
2+
3+
## Evaluation of course, meeting
4+
5+
- 22 May, 13:00 - 14:00
6+
7+
### Goals of meeting (do we agree?)
8+
9+
- Go through the ideas and make decisions on needed changes
10+
- Agree?
11+
- [DECIDED] Yes: RB, BB, BC JY, RP, PO
12+
- No:
13+
- including the idea about making "**connected**" courses that could be (optional) **prerequisites** (to take if you do not already have that knowledge) so we have a series of courses that together would give what they need to run something (like you need to be able to login, find modules, use linux, know about batch, know some python, learn about pandas, learn about matplotlib, learn how to use python/pandas/matplotlib in HPC) - maybe not all of those, but you get my point
14+
- this is not something that need to/can be decided on at this point
15+
- We at least need to agree on what to keep in or remove from the course now while we're fresh on the details of what did and didn't work and while we have plenty of time to make major overhauls.
16+
- True
17+
- RB: I think the chairman gets to decide here.
18+
Sure, he/she is quite likely to listen :-)
19+
- ?Make up the day divisions and dates? (Is the vague Nov/Dec correct) (perhaps postpone actual dates, at least not needed to be 4 days in a row)
20+
- I checked and we seem to have dates decided: 24-25 Nov + 1-2 Dec
21+
- ?form groups?
22+
- ?Find one with the overview/ responsible?
23+
24+
Add to agenda if needed
25+
26+
### Non-goals of meeting (do we agree?)
27+
28+
- Discuss things that are unrelated to the practical matters of the course
29+
- Agree: BC, RB, BB, PO, JY, RP
30+
- Disagree:
31+
- Debate things (repeatedly) based on incomplete information when
32+
1) we know that more relevant information is forthcoming, and
33+
2) the information needed to make a final decision will arrive in plenty of time to adapt our material.
34+
- Identification of session LOs/exercises and optional ones (up to group?)
35+
36+
### Agenda after identifying goals
37+
38+
- links to evaluations
39+
- summary
40+
- ideas
41+
- acting points
42+
43+
### Evaluations
44+
45+
- [Day 1 results and analysis](https://uppmax.github.io/naiss_intro_python/evaluations/20250424/)
46+
- [Day 2 results and analysis](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250425_day_2/README.md)
47+
- [Day 3 results and analysis](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250428_day_3/README.md)
48+
- [Day 4 results and analysis](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/tree/main/evaluations/20250429_day_4/README.md)
49+
- [Whole course](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/README.md) (includes detailed feedback from Linus)
50+
51+
### Summary of evaluations
52+
53+
- confidence
54+
55+
### Ideas
56+
57+
- [Jayant] More InfraVis-like collaborations demoing usecases
58+
- [DECIDED] Agree: BB, BC, RB, PO, JY, RP
59+
- Keep it as it is:
60+
- Disagree:
61+
- No opinion:
62+
- BC: More InfraVis-like collaborations only works when
63+
courses are more divided
64+
- BB+BC: Sure, lets do so, and decide later
65+
- [RB] From the learners, I read [a suggestion to make day 2 'Intro to HPC, usage and management of software and code'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L47) and ['it seemed to me that the time was not spent on the right things'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250425_day_2/pace.txt#L12). What about we listen to that?
66+
- Keep it as it is:
67+
- Give a better refresher:
68+
- Move 'Slurm and batch jobs' from Day 3 to Day 2: RB, BB, BC
69+
- Move matplotlib on Day 2 to another day/course: RB
70+
- Move IDEs on Day 2 to another day:
71+
- Move IDEs on Day 2 to another course:
72+
- Move most of Pandas and Matplotlib on Day 3 to another course; just talk about loading them
73+
- [BC]: IDEs could be a stand-alone course (either python or wider)
74+
- python or wider? (already included in the R-MATLAB-Julia, so perhaps call it Python IDEs in HPC)
75+
- naiss wide: interactive/on demand
76+
- Jupyter, Spyder, VSCodium,
77+
- [Richel] From the learners I read the suggested topic ['How to find compatible modules and packages'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250425_day_2/future_topics.txt#L9).
78+
That this would be useful is also mentioned by this learner
79+
['Learning about modules and packages and handling the dependency hell in various ways is very good'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L19)
80+
I think it is great idea to add more time for getting modules to work.
81+
What about we add it? On the other hand, one learner stated
82+
['The fix would be to make sure every single command that loads a module or a python package does specify a specific version'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L57), which would mean to make the course material more version-explicit. I am up for both!
83+
- Add more time for getting modules to work: RB, (BB can agree, but this may be a bit more time consuming)
84+
- we really try already
85+
- [?KEEP DOING THIS?] Make all course material version specific: RB, BB (since this is faster/takes less time from other things)
86+
- We think we already do this :-)
87+
- [BC]: basically conda environments?
88+
- [RB]: No, the learner means to use an explicit version,
89+
e.g. `module load something/1.2.3`
90+
over `module load something` (i.e. without version)
91+
- [BC]: or will Pixi work better in HPC environments (even Kebnekaise?)
92+
- Make no changes:
93+
- PO: Is there already a NAISS module course?
94+
- Yes there is
95+
- PO: what about making following the NAISS modules a prerequisite?
96+
- [Richel] One learner mentioned ['some part or parts had lots of spelling errors'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250425_day_2/comments.txt#L7). I hope the spell checker (we can get it to work when using markdown) will fix that
97+
- Will we run Markdown next time?
98+
- Yes: BB, RB, BC, JY, RP, PO
99+
- No:
100+
- [Richel] One learner mentioned ['Asking us to do stuff on the breaks is BAD'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250425_day_2/comments.txt#L7). What about we stick to our scheduled breaks?
101+
- Follow the breaks as in the schedule: RB
102+
- If learners are not prepared, it is up to them to figure out things in the break. If our fault, not: BC
103+
- RB: The learner meant only for things that are our fault, e.g. running over time or
104+
not having the time to do exercises under lesson time
105+
- Have 15m always (10 min is not enough, i.e. no "leg stretch"): RB, BC
106+
- Lunch HAS to be 60 min and start 12.00: BC, RB
107+
- Ignore breaks:
108+
- [Richel] A learner stated ['Anders Hast deserves special mention for bringing true researcher enthusiasm, it is great to learn from teachers that know and enjoy the subject at hand like that'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L11). Could we give Anders more time for his exercise? Now there were only 6 minutes of exercises (on the YouTube video: 28:47-34:02)
109+
- Give Anders more time: RB, BB, RP
110+
- Yes, but only if ML/DL gets its own day: BC
111+
- Keep the current schedule:
112+
- [Richel] A learner [exercises should be part of the course under course time](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L25),
113+
with the problem that ['we might not get knowledge/skill presumed by later parts of the course'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L27).
114+
What about we give our learners the time to do exercises, as well as test if indeed they were able to do so?
115+
Adding more time for a session seems fine be my.
116+
- JY: One problem is the time some exercises take, e.g. scheduled jobs
117+
- Add more time for exercises and make sure they are ready
118+
for future sessions: RB, BC
119+
- Reduce the number of required exercises: BC
120+
- [FAVORITE] Mark exercises as important and optional: RB, BB, BC
121+
- Require homework:
122+
- ~~~Ask learners to work during the breaks~~~
123+
- [Richel] A learner stated ['The session on IDEs had barely enough time for me to get Jupyter running, while I would've expected to try VS Code and Spyder as well since all of them are in there'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L29).
124+
What about we give this session more time?
125+
- [FAVORITE] Keep the schedule as it is: JY, BB
126+
- Give IDEs more time: RB
127+
- Parallel/simultaneous sessions:
128+
- Only do Jupyter: RB
129+
- See next bullet: BC, RB
130+
- Move IDEs to own course/workshop: (BC) BB
131+
132+
- LOs and exercises. What about more session where we can split groups, e.g. in IDEs, choose 1 of three in exercise, but present all tracks briefly in main room
133+
- keep as is: RB
134+
- LOs+optional
135+
- LOs+tracks+optional (where learners decide themselves): BC, RB
136+
- RB: WHat is meant by 'tracks'? Is this a simultaneous session? I've assumed so :-)
137+
138+
- [Richel] A learner suggested [a 4 day schedule](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/202504_course/evaluation_202504_full_course.md?plain=1#L47).
139+
I know that 'Intro to Python' will get more HPC-ey,
140+
among others by adding 'how to loading Python
141+
package modules'.
142+
- [Richel] A learners suggested ['could you please post the recordings a bit faster next time'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250428_day_3/comments.txt#L6)
143+
and ['would be better to have them in the same youtube list as the rest though'](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/evaluations/20250428_day_3/comments.txt#L6). I think the first is a bit harsh.
144+
The second is doable: just add the existing video to the HPC2N playlist (i.e you can do
145+
that in YouTube).
146+
- Link to videos in YouTube playlist: RB
147+
- Upload videos of Day 1 twice:
148+
- No opinion: PO
149+
Alternatively, we can put the videos in a table on the website too.
150+
- Add a table on the website with all links: RB
151+
- Rely on the YouTube playlists only:
152+
- [FAVORITE] Both, with preference to YouTube:
153+
BB (since people/our users are more likely to find it there without having to find the course website again),
154+
BC, RB, RP
155+
156+
Move items below for next meeting? It is 14:00 ...?
157+
- [DECIDED] Move to next meeting: RB, BC, RP
158+
- Next course time is in November/December
159+
- [DECIDED] BC makes Doodle
160+
- Do more now: BB
161+
162+
163+
- Exercise rooms (perhaps later decision)
164+
- Let teachers decide how they teach: RB
165+
- always try to keep 2-3 persons in each room (BC and RB has good experience here): RB
166+
- larger rooms: RB
167+
- cluster rooms: RB
168+
- combination of above: RB
169+
- [Richel] One fun thing we did in another course, is to let the learners rename themselves, to
170+
include the cluster name, e.g. `Thora` becomes `[Dardel] Thora`
171+
- Let teachers decide how they teach: RB
172+
- Let's do this in the introduction: RB
173+
- [Richel] In some courses we measure the initial confidence our learners have at the start,
174+
such as [Day 1](https://uppmax.github.io/naiss_intro_python/evaluations/20250424/#analysis-pre-and-post).
175+
What about we do this at the other days too?
176+
- Never measure the initial confidence: RB
177+
- Keep it as it is: RB
178+
- Let's try to measure the initial confidence at each day: RB
179+
- BB: Interconnected courses: we need to connect our courses better
180+
- Use a working group (i.e. one working group per workshop): BC, RB
181+
- Agree: RB, BB
182+
- Not yet:
183+
- No:
184+
- JY: ML/DL should be more about workflows than core principles.
185+
Core principles should be its own separate course.
186+
- JY: Do HPC centeres have the packages by Google Collabs?
187+
- BC: Presentation as PDF
188+
- JY: Recording professionalisms, there are better tools than Zoom
189+
- JY: How to do recordings, i.e. blurring out names?
190+
- BB: knows the GDPR rules
191+
192+
### Action points
193+
194+
195+
## [Notes from previous meeting](https://github.com/UPPMAX/HPC-python/blob/main/meeting_notes/20250422.md)
196+

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)