config/configure.py -> configure?

[Satish Balay]

The primary reason we have ./config/configure.py [instead of
./configure] is due to the presence of ./config/bgp-ibm-opt.py etc
scripts which use ./config/configure.py

So now usage of ./config/configure.py or ./config/bgp-ibm-opt.py is
consistant.

We can have ./configure as a link to ./config/configure.py [at the
cost of making the user interface of ./configure vs
./config/bgp-ibm-opt.py inconsistant]

And the reason we want to promote usage of ./config/bgp-ibm-opt.py
notation is so that we we don't have users creating shell scripts with
configure options in them.

Satish


> From: Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov>
> 
>     petsc-dev folks,
> 
>     is there any technical reason we cannot just change the name of  
> config/configure.py to configure?
> (does Windows care about the .py and python in cygwin?)
> 
>     is there any nontechnical reason we cannot/should not make the  
> change?
> 
>     Barry
> 
> My thinking is "the more like what people are use to, the less other  
> people have to learn/deal with,
> the easier it is for people". Seems like a "little thing" but little  
> things accumulate into big things if you
> don't eliminate as many little things as possible.
> 
>