You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In order to better describe the functionality of the software and guard against confusion with the general mpc simulation package developed here: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/mpcpy/0.3.0, I am proposing to change the name of MPCPy.
Github will redirect all traffic and workflow elements to the new repository. See here for information: https://help.github.com/articles/renaming-a-repository/. However, to avoid confusion, I encourage cloning again the new repository.
I am soliciting ideas and feedback from others. So far, my ideas are:
MPCBuild
OpenBuildingMPC
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
MPCBuild, OpenBuildingMPC = "limited" to building applications; is this the case?
RapidMPC; MPCPy... MPCfactory = completely open. Is this what we want?
If the framework is restricted to particular (building) applications, I would suggest "buildings/build" in the name. If it is restricted to energy-system (district scale?) applications --> I have no good idea. If it should be open for general MPC applications, I like e.g. RapidMPC.
In order to better describe the functionality of the software and guard against confusion with the general mpc simulation package developed here: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/mpcpy/0.3.0, I am proposing to change the name of MPCPy.
Github will redirect all traffic and workflow elements to the new repository. See here for information: https://help.github.com/articles/renaming-a-repository/. However, to avoid confusion, I encourage cloning again the new repository.
I am soliciting ideas and feedback from others. So far, my ideas are:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: