[petsc-dev] PTScotch 6

[Satish Balay]

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013, Jed Brown wrote:

> Also, I would prefer to name maintenance releases 3.4.X instead of 3.4pX so
> that version comparison macros can be used. Sometimes PETSc fixes a bug in
> a maintenance release and other applications do not have a nice way to test
> for that. Subminor release numbers conventionally mean "source- and
> binary-compatible", so I don't see any value in  3.4pX numbering.

This was proposed before aswell. Its fine by me. We'll have to fix our
scripts to handle it 

and determine what to do with PETSC_VERSION_SUBMINOR and
PETSC_VERSION_PATCH [and how it will affect current usage of macros?]

Satish