Picongpu: Should we make a special label for spack installation related issues?

[sbastrakov]

Given we are getting much more questions regarding those this year, maybe having a label would help to simplify searching for existing issues.

[PrometheusPi]

I agree with @sbastrakov - adding a SPACK label would be helpful. Additionally, @psychocoderHPC more documentation on how to set up Spack would be helpful.

[sbastrakov]

I am not sure on the latter part. I feel the documentation is only not fully clear in terms of loading the profile, I will extend this part. Other spack things I feel work out of the box in good conditions, and issues arise when something can't be compiled on a system. However, that's my computer scientists' vision, and maybe some things I assume automatically should be actually described in more detail.

[sbastrakov]

I think we could also ask the recent new users who used spack for their feedback?

[steindev]

I agree in all three points with @sbastrakov!

[sbastrakov]

Okay, so I've made a label called install: spack and applied it to some issues which were questions about spack specifically (so e.g. not how to compile LWFA, but how to install PIConGPU with spack or troubleshoot). However, we also have pre-existing label called install. Should they both exist, if so should they both be used for such questions or only the more specific spack one? For other dichotomies, there would be e.g. backend: X and backend: Y, not just backend and backend: X

[sadia1997]

I'm facing issues installing PiconGpu with Spack. Can someone guide me ?

[sbastrakov]

Hello @sadia1997 . Sure, we can help. Please open a new issue and describe there what are you doing and what kind of issues you face.