On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 04:32:54PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: > Are there any strong opinions on keeping or removing the Trilinos > backend from DOLFIN? I ask now because there is a maintenance burden > in having both (I'm feeling this acutely with the switch to local > dof indices), and the Trilinos backend gets far less polishing and > testing than the PETSc backend, which can make a less favourable > impression on users who use the Trilinos backend. > > Another issue is that it is becoming difficult to provide users with > a common interface to more sophisticated solvers since these are > closely tied to the design of the underling linear algebra backend.
I've never really used the Trilinos backend but think that it has been a good design decision for us to keep both PETSc and Trilinos as options. That said, I certainly can't afford to spend any time on maintaining it so I understand if you feel the same. -- Anders _______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
