[petsc-dev] plans for PETSc release

[Barry Smith]

> On Apr 24, 2016, at 3:08 PM, Lisandro Dalcin <dalcinl at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 24 April 2016 at 22:48, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>> On the other hand, a feature freeze for a week is a perfect opportunity for improving documentation and other work that will not break the code. And even if one prefers to keep coding, new features can still be put in next for testing. Particularly if communicated in advance ("Hey, we will have a feature freeze in 7 days and plan to release in 10 days"), people can easily arrange things. I think Lisandro's feature would have been ready on time if he had known 7 days in advance.
>> 
>>   Nonsense, he knew weeks ahead.

   Lisandro,

     My only point in stating this was that you were aware a release was coming up, not that you had done anything wrong at all. I know you have been devoting a great deal of time to adding TS features and fixing many things in TS and we all appreciate it. There was a lot of cleanup in TS needed and there was not enough time for you to get it all done plus add features before the (artificial) release date. I apologize for any offense, I should have stated it more clearly that what I meant to say was "knowing when a release is coming doesn't magically make more time for someone to finish their work". 

   I am fine with putting your features in the release 3.7; the advantage of them getting in 3.7 is that they can be mentioned in the changes file (dev.html) and in the release announcement. If we put them in 3.7.1 then there is a much bigger chance people will not notice them. You have two branches

2016-04-24 16:06:35 +0300  (origin/dalcinl/tsbdf) TS: Add BDF implementation
2016-04-24 16:28:04 +0300  (origin/dalcinl/ts-2nd-order-systems) TSALPHA2: Add tutorial example ex44

I will put them in maint now and they can be tested in the daily before Satish makes the tarball on Monday. If anything breaks we can deal with it, no big deal.

  Barry


  
> 
> Dear Barry, your comments are a bit unfair. I've been working hard the
> last two months to get my features in. However, in the process of
> developing them, I found many issues in the TS interface as well as
> implementation that needed proper fixing before adding my stuff. I
> could be an irresponsible guy, and just put my crap in, add hacks here
> and there as needed to get my stuff work as I want, and do not care at
> all about all the cleanup and refactoring that was required. It was
> not easy, I had to touch many pieces that interact each other, in the
> process I broke the builds more than once as you likely remember. And
> still there are things that should be fixed or done better.
> 
> At this point, if PETSc 3.7.0 has to be released because of political
> issues, and we will accept adding new forward-compatible APIs in
> 3.7.1, then that's fine with me. It is not my intention to delay the
> release or put you in the pressure of accepting my new features if
> that does not convince you. If you guys decide that adding APIs in
> 3.7.1 is not acceptable, then I'll be a little bit disappointed, but
> is not the end of the world, I should be able to live with that :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Lisandro Dalcin
> ============
> Research Scientist
> Computer, Electrical and Mathematical Sciences & Engineering (CEMSE)
> Extreme Computing Research Center (ECRC)
> King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST)
> http://ecrc.kaust.edu.sa/
> 
> 4700 King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
> al-Khawarizmi Bldg (Bldg 1), Office # 0109
> Thuwal 23955-6900, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
> http://www.kaust.edu.sa
> 
> Office Phone: +966 12 808-0459