fenics team mailing list archive

[Martin Sandve Alnæs <martinal@xxxxxxxxx>]

Having outdated docstrings if you forget to run a magic script in some
folder is not very convenient. (And why is it so slow?)

Martin


On 22 March 2013 10:07, Johan Hake <hake.dev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 03/22/2013 09:06 AM, Anders Logg wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:58:43AM +0000, Florian Rathgeber wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:06:14PM +0100, Martin Sandve Alnæs
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> By this argument, there isn't much we can remove.
> >> How about using git-fat to handle large files that we don't want in
> >> the repository, but still be able to pull in on demand? Jed has a
> >> recipe for filtering an existing repository and taking a list of files
> >> to be handled by git-fat:
> >> https://github.com/jedbrown/git-fat/blob/master/test-retroactive.sh
> >
> > For me as a newcomer to git, it seems like an extra complication, and
> > the problem is not that we have a bunch of files which are very
> > large. It's more that we have very many files of moderate size that we
> > generate and these change frequently. Furthermore, we can only a apply
> > a filter to a few of these files so we would need to list them
> > manually.
> >
> > It seems there a differing opinions on a few matters:
> >
> > - Should we care about conversion of branches?
> >
> >   My opinion is yes. There are quite a few active branches on
> >   Launchpad, more than I had thought.
>
> Agree.
>
> > - Should we strip files from the history? Or just leave it as it is?
> >
> >   My opinion is yes. We will archive the full repository on the web
> >   page and possibly some archive site so that historians can go back
> >   and excavate the history in full detail.
> >
> >   It needs to be discussed exactly which files to remove. See earlier
> >   post for a suggestion.
> >
> > - Should we remove meshes from the repository?
> >
> >   My opinion is yes. The meshes have already been removed and
> >   a working system for easily downloading the meshes is in place.
> >   This system will encourage the use of more interesting meshes (since
> >   they no longer need to be very small) and will encourage
> >   contribution of meshes to the gallery on the web page.
>
> Just to clarify. The meshes you are talking about are meshes not used in
> demos, right? If so, I agree.
>
> > - Should we remove generated code from the repository?
> >
> >   Martin has some good arguments in favor of keeping the generated
> >   code, but I'm not fully convinced. A compromise would be to include
> >   all files needed to build the library itself, which essentially
> >   means keeping the generated code in dolfin/ale.
>
> I think we should keep these in the repo.
>
> >   But does that mean we should also keep all the old generated code
> >   that was part of the library at some point?
>
> No strong opinion.
>
> All the swig code can be regenerated by dolfin provided tools so that is
> OK to remove. However the docstring generation code is really slow, and
> is pretty annoying to generate. But as others have mentioned. This could
> be a cmake-cached process, which is only done once, unless the
> CMakeCache is removed or one trigger the generation script under
> cmake/scripts.
>
> Johan
>
> > --
> > Anders
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> > Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> Post to     : fenics@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>