[Rivet] Rivet dev sprint session

[Frank Siegert]

Hi Leif, Andy,

On 5 October 2012 10:33, Andy Buckley <andy.buckley at ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 05/10/12 10:23, Leif Lönnblad wrote:
>> On 2012-10-04 18:10, Frank Siegert wrote:
>>> I've added a first draft to the doc/ directory using the same text
>>> sources as the manual.
>>
>> Looks good!
>>
>> To complicate things, I would like to make a suggestion. I just talked
>> to Gavin Salam, who is one of the editors for the "tools" section of
>> EPJC, and he said they would be happy to publish the manual (after
>> proper refereeing, of course). I guess there would be two reasons to
>> choose EPJC before CPC. EPJC does not have the strict format that CPC
>> has (on the other hand Frank have already done most of this work, and we
>> would still need to use the EPJC style files). Both Springer and
>> Elsevier are money-hungry big private companies, but at least Springer
>> has recently committed EPJC to open access.
>
> Mainly for the open access reason, if EPJC will really publish this (did
> Gavin mention anything that we would have to emphasise -- demonstrations
> of analysis output, generator comparison content, etc.?) then I would
> personally prefer that route to the strict format and inaccessibility of
> CPC. Thanks for the rapid work, Frank!

I can definitely be convinced to go with EPJC Tools rather than
Elsevier-CPC if it is clarified a priori that the scope of the Rivet
manual is suitable for it. I would be opposed if we have to beef it up
with more physics content (discussion of analyses, generator
comparisons, ...) since that is not the purpose of this manual. One
disadvantage of EPJC is its two-column layout, but if somebody
volunteers to re-linebreak all our \kbd inputs then that's going to be
fine ;-)

Cheers,
Frank