[Petsc-trilinos-discussion] Status update, summary remarks

[Jed Brown]

Lois Curfman McInnes <curfman at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
> The recent discussions about concrete issues in the combined use of
> PETSc and Trilinos are indeed a valuable exchange of information ---
> useful for at a practical level for existing apps and future plans.
> However, tackling current interoperability challenges in existing
> codes and other near-term issues is not ASCR's priority in this
> particular assignment (though of course those issues inform the vision
> -- and we might want to pursue that to some extent as a separate
> activity outside the scope of the longer-term vision project).

I don't understand how one can define a long-term vision without
ensuring that it addresses the present-day challenges.

How does a document engage the community?  How about outlining the
things that we (PETSc, Trilinos, and other library developers) could do
to improve interoperability, the pros and cons from the application
developers' perspective, and a rough estimate of the cost for us to
maintain.  Then applications could say something about which of these
strategies they think are important, and Thomas can make an informed
decision about allocating funding.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-trilinos-discussion/attachments/20131125/317976a6/attachment.pgp>