[petsc-dev] broken nightlybuilds (next vs next-tmp)

[Jed Brown]

"Smith, Barry F." <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> writes:

>    You are arguing against a change in the abstract because you love
>    next! You are making up stray men and attacking them. Wait until
>    there is a real proposal then point out flaws and make suggestions
>    on how to improve it. There is no reason to develop the new model
>    until we have the test harness done so the new model would have any
>    hope of working.

I'm hearing "when we get rid of 'next'" as though it's a foregone
conclusion.  I think 'next' provides value, but if a testing system is
shown to keep 'next' clean without undue burden on developers, I don't
have a problem removing it.  I think doing that is hard.

>    Regardless of what next/.../... model you want we all benefit
>    greatly from a much faster testing. Surely you cannot be opposed to
>    that.

Yes, let's revisit this thread AFTER the testing system is working.