fenics team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:57:12AM +0100, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> On 26 February 2013 10:07, Garth N. Wells <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On 26 February 2013 01:16, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:13:44AM +0100, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote:
> >
> >> - I think the two-way split (keeping dolfin separate, joining at least
> > >> ufc-ffc-ufl) sounds most compelling and carries less risk.
> > >
> >
> > Even more granular would be ufc-ffc. That way, FFC would contain all
> > the code formatting.
> >
> > > I'm still tempted by having one big repo.
> > >
> >
> > I'm inclined to stay close to the status quo. If a big repo is
> > contemplated, someone should make one and we can test if it's workable
> > with bzr. It may just be too big and bzr too slow.
>
>
> The best way to do such things is usually gradually. The first steps could
> be:
> 1) Move ufc into the ffc repo.
> 2) Move dolfin wrapper generation back from dolfin to ffc?
> In these cases there are no big history and patching issues,
> so this can be done soon with no issues whatsoever (but
> preferably after we merge the work in progress by Anders and I).

Sounds like a good start. Any objections to this?

Does this need we need to use CMake for FFC?

-- 
Anders