[petsc-dev] workflow diagram

[Jed Brown]

Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:

> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
>> > Perhaps if there arrows were flipped the confusion could be reduced?
>> 
>> What do you mean by "flipped"?
>
> instead of  (a) ---> (b)
>
> use:        (a) <--- (b)
>
> The arrow represend 'parent' relationship anyway

This is a perfect reflection of the data structure, but I think a lot of
people intuitively think of the flow rather than dependency
relationships.  Also, having the arrowhead at the new merge commits
connotes the ordering of events (or that's my perception).

Does anyone else think it would be better with arrows pointed the other
way?

> The confusion with forward facing arrows occurs when its interpreted
> as 'data flow' or something that has 'time-factor' associated with it.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20140430/0c0ef9e9/attachment.sig>