Hi all, Having discussed this around the Firedrake mob (except Florian who is still away), we don't have any objection to UFC going into FFC. Indeed, since our FFC branch does indeed have a non-UFC backend, it might even make us cleaner and move us towards the point at which we can start talking with you about merging our stuff into trunk.
One small issue which will crop up is that FFC uses setuptools while UFC has a cmake build process. We would really like a combined package to be installable with setuptools (I don't expect this would cause any huge issues). We would be less happy about UFL going into FFC, as we think that breaks an important abstraction. We would be really, really unhappy about any of the above being merged with Dolfin, as that would give us a Dolfin dependency which is really non-trivial. However neither of those merges are being proposed right now, so I'm not sure we need to have that discussion now. Regards, David On 8 January 2014 08:03, Martin Sandve Alnæs <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to merging ufc into ffc. > > I'd rather not merge in ufl (yet). > > I plan to merge uflacs into ffc at a later date but not yet. > > It would be nice if we then split out the compiled stuff from ffc into a > separate python module and place all python modules from ufc and ffc in a > shared src/ or site-packages/ directory, as this makes it easier to add to > python path without installation for running tests. > > Martin > 7. jan. 2014 23:23 skrev "Anders Logg" <[email protected]> følgende: > > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 10:12:51PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote: >> > We’ve discussed over the past year consolidating FEniCS packages. The >> motivations are: >> > >> > - Fewer packages for users to install >> > - Less confusion over dependency versions >> > - Simpler development and testing (fewer cross-package dependencies and >> package tests that depend on other packages) >> > - Reduced burden of making releases (which will hopefully lead to more >> frequent releases) >> > >> > Now that the first FEniCS release from git/Bitbucket has been made, >> > I suggest that we start evolving towards consolidation (rather than >> > taking any radical steps). As a first step, I propose that we merge >> > FFC and UFC into one package. This doesn’t mean that FFC and UFC are >> > suddenly deeply linked, but that UFC becomes one of the implemented >> > FFC targets (and at first, the only). Longer term, having >> > backends/targets in FFC will make the addition of new generation >> > targets easier to develop. >> > >> > Please respond with thoughts and opinions on merging FFC and UFC! >> >> I'm very positive to this idea. >> >> I think UFL could also be merged into the same project. I know there >> will be objections to this from those who only use UFL (David Ham >> objected last time I suggested this), but still think it would be >> possible to resolve this by adding an option to only install UFL, >> something like >> >> cd ufl && sudo python setup.py install >> >> Another thing to consider is Debian/Ubuntu packages. I believe some >> work will be involved there as well (to apply for new packages and >> adjust dependencies), so perhaps it would not be optimal to make many >> "small" changes to the package organization? Or is it easy? Johannes >> can comment on this. >> >> -- >> Anders >> _______________________________________________ >> fenics mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics >> > -- Dr David Ham Departments of Mathematics and Computing Imperial College London http://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/david.ham
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
