Update installation instructions to current practice

[prjemian]

Time to update the installer script. What it says now is out-of-date:

use_bluesky/install/install_startup.sh

Lines 4 to 7 in 288aa90

	# purpose:
	# install Bluesky IPython startup directory
	# with default instrument package into `pwd`
	# (within a IPython profile directory).

Now using a directory layout like this one:

~/
  bin/
    blueskyStarter.sh  --> ~/bluesky/blueskyStarter.sh
  bluesky/
    blueskyStarter.sh
    console/
      __start_bluesky_instrument__.py
    instrument/
  .ipython-bluesky/
    profile_bluesky/
      startup/
        __start_bluesky_instrument__.py --> ~/bluesky/console/__start_bluesky_instrument__.py

and __start_bluesky_instrument__.py contains:

"""
start bluesky in IPython session
"""

# start a Bluesky data collection console session
import pathlib, sys
sys.path.append(str(pathlib.Path.home()))

# terse error dumps
get_ipython().run_line_magic('xmode', 'Minimal')

from instrument.collection import *

[prjemian]

@mdwyman Thanks for the incentive.

[prjemian]

Deposit the __start_bluesky_instrument__.py file into https://github.com/BCDA-APS/bluesky_training/tree/main/bluesky/resources

It should not go into the parent directory since that directory must remain compatible with the bluesky-queueserver and have only one .py file.

[prjemian]

Also, update the instrument_package_guide.md file to include use and maintenance of instrument/iconfig.yml.

[mdwyman]

@prjemian I worked through the new install instructions but early on had to use micromamba instead of conda on the install bluesky environment step (https://github.com/BCDA-APS/use_bluesky/tree/119-update-install-advice/install#install-bluesky-environment). If conda was going to "solve" the environment, it would have taken >30 min (I stopped after this much elapsed). I found the micromamba instructions in the yaml file comments and it seemed to finish in <5 min. Are we moving away from conda? Should we make this explicit?

I was doing this from the APS network on beamline machines and a BC machine -- none of the conda environments were solved within 30 min. I tried several of the environments (2021_2, 2022_1, 2022_2, 2022_3) to same effect

[prjemian]

Exactly. I was testing this out in August, coming to the same conclusions as you. So I installed micromamba in the base environments on APSshare. The downside is that it uses different directories than conda for local environments. So, yes, use micromamba instead of conda now.

…

On Tue, Sep 20, 2022, 5:41 PM Max Wyman ***@***.***> wrote: @prjemian <https://github.com/prjemian> I worked through the new install instructions but early on had to use micromamba instead of conda on the install bluesky environment step ( https://github.com/BCDA-APS/use_bluesky/tree/119-update-install-advice/install#install-bluesky-environment). If conda was going to "solve" the environment, it would have taken >30 min (I stopped after this much elapsed). I found the micromamba instructions in the yaml file comments and it seemed to finish in <5 min. Are we moving away from conda? Should we make this explicit? I was doing this from the APS network on beamline machines and a BC machine -- none of the conda environments were solved within 30 min. I tried several of the environments (2021_2, 2022_1, 2022_2, 2022_3) to same effect — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#119 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AARMUMFXK2L2N5OP7UASHUDV7HLJDANCNFSM53LBUBEA> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>