Atomate v2: issues that require issues

[computron]

Here are some issues that may require their own separate issues at some point

• Hard to know how to write workflows where there are multiple parallel calculations followed by an analysis step. Should the analysis step be part of the workflow itself, or should a builder perform the analysis based on raw calculations in the task database?
• Can't use atomate in "offline" mode. The VaspCalcDb doesn't support any kind of offline. Not sure if we should even try or not
• What to do about atomate builders? Keep as-is or use MP builder framework?

[JosephMontoya-TRI]

• I think builder > analysis generally, but beware that builders require kind of a different style thinking about how to organize and ensure all of the tasks contain all of the metadata one needs. We've had to work really hard (perhaps too hard) to ensure that builders are agnostic to workflow-level information in emmet, which isn't necessary if you're doing the analysis as part of the workflow, since you can just pass the analysis firework the information it needs.
• I don't think offline is worth it.
• I think we should use the MP builder framework, mostly I don't think anyone from MP is going to want to duplicate the effort that went into it and the processes should probably be the same anyway (perhaps with atomate's build being a subset of the larger MP build procedure).

[JosephMontoya-TRI]

I also want to add a feature I'd like to see realized (I'm doing it here not as a request for someone else to implement, but in the hopes that whatever refactor may come will not preclude it). I think the fact that atomate requires a shared filesystem to pass things like VASP files to be a bit of a burden and very much wish that these files could be passed, synced, etc. through a cloud storage resource.