Re: towards feff8.2 release

["John J. Rehr" <jjr@leonardo.phys.washington.edu>]

Dear Matt,

  Thank you for your comments on the proposed changes for FEFF8.2.
I will not reply to all of them, because it seems difficult to
separate the signal from all the noise in various exchanges with
you in these matters.

   It's too bad that you feel your 'contributions and suggestions
given in the past have been routinely ignored and undervalued.'
I would say they are highly valued, though not always implemented
immediately. Also I would say that though we do value outside help,
"volunteer" help is neither expected nor wanted if not offered freely.
 
> And yet, the plan put forth now seems to DEPEND on work being
> done outside UW Physics.  
  Why not? No one can do it all, of course. Our main expertise lies in
the physics of scattering and X*S and we want our codes to evolve
toward a less parochial form that with more up to date computer science.

> A project like Feff is critically dependent on who is involved.
> I think you would do well to identify potential developers and
> get their feedback on what they would like to see and what they
> would want in return before you decide what is going to be done
> and ask for volunteers to do work that you want done but do not
> want to do yourselves.

   Thank you for this suggestion.  I was thinking of this  somewhat
differently. For example, I imagined different developers concentrating
on their own pet applications (e.g., ATOMS, GIFEFFIT, FEFF, LSMS etc.)
but wanting to make use of eachothers codes.  However, you are listed as a
member of the FEFF Project, so I would like to know what you "would like
to see" and what you would want in return." The same goes for any other
developer reading this message.  

   Finally I would like to take this one thing at a time, e.g., on
a quid pro quo basis. For example, how about developing an open source
version of genfmt that is compatible with FEFFx and xFEFFIT for starters.

   Sincerely,
   John
   PI FEFF Project