Hi list, we have 46 violations of squid:S3725 https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?id=com.powsybl%3Apowsybl-core&resolved=false&rules=squid%3AS3725 However, as verbally confirmed by mathbagu

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 12:21 PM, HARPER Jon wrote: I vote for disabling the squid:S3725 ruleYou have my vote for disabling the rule squid:S3725 Should we use the "poll" tool from the distribution

I agree to disable this rule too. If we decide to disable it, we have to create a file that explains which rules are disabled and the reason why.

I also vote in favor of this proposition. Sébastien

Hi everybody, It seems that some of you have problems to receive the emails posted in the LFE lists. I am trying to fix that problem with the support. Sorry for this spam ! Anne

Hi Boris, It seems that our builds are queued really often. The merge of a PR can take almost 4 or 5 hours. We really need to find a way to work more efficiently with github. Two ideas : -

Hi TSC members, The previous poll enables to decide the people in charge for some repositories of the powsybl organization. The simple majority has be reached and the “yes” answer of the poll

Hi Anne, all, It would be OK for me to be in charge of powsybl-hpc releases. It may be obvious, but please note that for “second level” repos, releases of “core” repos may require a

Hi all, @Sylvain: yes, there is a need for coordination for releases. I think a good solution would be to have a regular release for all repos (once every six weeks? or something like that?). Do you

Hi, I have no remarks, and I agree with this proposition. Regards, Sébastien MURGEY

I agree De : powsybl-tsc@... <powsybl-tsc@...> de la part de MURGEY Sebastien via Lists.Lfenergy.Org <sebastien.murgey=rte-france.com@...> Envoyé : lundi 18 novembre 2019 14:41 À :

I also agree with the proposition. Geoffroy De : powsybl-tsc@... <powsybl-tsc@...> de la part de HARPER Jon via Lists.Lfenergy.Org <jon.harper=rte-france.com@...> Envoyé : lundi 18 novembre 2019

Hi all, As you may know, we are currently working on the versionning of XIIDM. In this context, the main question we have is: do we need to handle the serialization of different versions? At first,

Hi all, On my side, I do not think the benefits of being able to do that kind of backward conversion are worth the complexity of the associated development. I do not have any critical use case for

Hi Sebastien, all, When Miora and I thought to the backward compatibility, we considered an architecture with 3 systems that exchange networks, but with a cyclic dependency. How do you update IIDM API

I think there are organisational ways to solve this type of issues. However, I understand the use case shared. It also largely depends on the rythm of breaking changes creation in IIDM. If every two

Hi, A summary, just to be sure I understand well the proposal: powsybl-hpc Review: Geoffroy (MPI), Sylvain (Slurm) Release: Sylvainpowsybl-afs Review: Paul, Geoffroy Release: Paul (release notes),

Hi all, 1) Unfortunately I think the use case is important. If we don’t have this feature, if one application provides IIDM data to other applications and if that first application wants to