[petsc-dev] Inquiry about contributing to MMG interface

[Barry Smith]

An attempt at complete details on making an MR   https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://petsc.org/release/developers/contributing/__;!!G_uCfscf7eWS!a1bbLw5WyJV3J-nT7Z3nTSKwJwV__JByZVLM7gnJkaJ4Te5me2x0zHqnrtQuQ0fcGofdMFdPKiheANeOyPLvqA$ 

Barry

MR on improving the details of making an MR are also always welcome :-)




> On Feb 5, 2025, at 10:05 AM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 9:52 AM neil liu <liufield at gmail.com <mailto:liufield at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Dear developers, 
>> I am currently working with MMG in the context of PETSc and have identified a need to modify the existing MMG interface, DMAdaptMetric_Mmg_Plex(), for our use case. Given these requirements, I would like to explore the feasibility of contributing to PETSc to enhance this interface, which has been verified and validated in our research code. 
>> 
>> Proposed Modifications:
>> 
>> Additional Labels for Physical Entities:
>> 
>> In addition to the existing bdLabel and rgLabel, our case requires two additional labels to represent physical vertices and edges within the computational domain (3D).
> I am open to this. Can you be more specific about what it means? 
>> One approach is to introduce two new parameters in the subroutine’s input list. However, this may require modifications across related components, such as Pragmatic. 
> This is not a problem. I can modify those. 
>> Support for Open Boundaries:
>> 
>> The current interface does not support open boundaries, a feature available in MMG.
>> As a result, several MMG benchmark cases involving open boundary remeshing cannot be executed within PETSc.
> Can you explain what this means? What is an open boundary exactly?
>  
>> Would this be a viable contribution to PETSc? If so, I would appreciate any guidance on the best approach to implementing these changes while maintaining compatibility with existing features.
>> 
> Yes. Please make a fork of the petsc repo, make a branch with the proposed changes, make an MR for that branch, and add me to your fork (I am knepley on GitLab). I can help you get it going.
> 
>   Thanks,
> 
>     Matt
>  
>> Looking forward to your thoughts.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks, 
>> Xiaodong 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener
> 
> https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/*knepley/__;fg!!G_uCfscf7eWS!a1bbLw5WyJV3J-nT7Z3nTSKwJwV__JByZVLM7gnJkaJ4Te5me2x0zHqnrtQuQ0fcGofdMFdPKiheANdhFPVnVA$  <https://urldefense.us/v3/__http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/*knepley/__;fg!!G_uCfscf7eWS!ckCV4wedb-tlOiMIwwdrJ8hJmPbjxoiJJVuJx7hov_xJtl2_sNakx4TEtStOUwqJxJKMbXCVXswizQ0r4ZmC$>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20250205/7c22777c/attachment-0001.html>