dolfin team mailing list archive

[Johan Jansson <jjan@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 01:17:48PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:49:03AM +0100, Johan Jansson wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 11:11:26AM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > I don't understand this. If you want to develop against the development
> > > version of DOLFIN, then get dolfin-dev.
> > > 
> > > If you get dolfin-fsi, you'll need to cope with both a changing kernel
> > > *and* potentially unstable module development in unrelated modules.
> > 
> > The kernel will improve, but not break. If you develop against
> > dolfin-dev, then after a pull you might discover that assembly no
> > longer works (which is ok in the kernel development tip), or something
> > more subtle. This is what we want to filter out with dolfin-fsi.
> > 
> >   Johan
> 
> How will the kernel improve? Will the kernel in dolfin-fsi have new
> functionality not present in dolfin-dev that will be merged back into
> dolfin-dev, or will dolfin-fsi pull certain things from dolfin-dev?
> Or both?
> 
> /Anders

With improve, I meant that new features or fixes from dolfin-dev will
propagate into dolfin-fsi, not that special improvements will only be
developed in dolfin-fsi. dolfin-fsi is not a carrier of kernel
development, it's simply there for people who want to develop
modules/applications for DOLFIN but are unable to keep up with the
development speed at the tip.

In practice, dolfin-fsi will just be a snapshot of dolfin-dev where
someone has taken care that the snapshot doesn't happen just when a
core function happens to be broken.

  Johan