Allright;
here comes my 2 cents on the topic: 1. The repo in question was for utilities which are not part of the build process; so the build process is 100% unaffected by this new repo. 2. Updating the build system in opm is admittedly quite cumbersome; my suggestion would be to have an opm-cmake repository which only contained the cmake module files. 3. The opm-parser and opm-core dependencies are obviously inverted and some reorganization here would be good. BUT: I really think that the implicit organization and encapsulation coming from using several repositories is essential for the survival of the opm code and the developers. The comparison with the Linux kernel is in my opinion only partly relevant: OPM consist of several semi-independent projects – the linux kernel is essentially one program; furthermore the number of developers is orders of magnitude different. Obviously they can handle more complexity. We maintain the same structure, but with branches instead That seems like a very very bad idea to me. Jaokim -----Original Message----- From: Opm [mailto:opm-boun...@opm-project.org] On Behalf Of Jørgen Kvalsvik Sent: 19. november 2014 18:37 To: opm@opm-project.org Subject: Re: [OPM] New repo opm-utilities On 2014-11-19 11:11, Bård Skaflestad wrote: > On 2014-11-19 17:41, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: >> On 2014-11-19 07:27, Alf Birger Rustad wrote: >>> Hello everybody, >>> >>> I am guilty of creating yet another repository in opm. [...] >> >> Honestly, I don't think it's that good an idea to have separate >> repositories at all [...] > > Noted. > >> 3. Increased maintenance cost of the build system, cmake modules >> especially. > > http://rolk.github.io/2013/09/23/build-system-sync/ Wouldn't it be better if this wasn't necessary? > So, you're proposing to undo the (more or less) careful separation of > responsibilities of user-facing features into autonomous but related > modules for the sake of build-time convenience for the *very* few OPM > developers? That won't happen as long as I have any say in the matter If you want to look at it that way, sure, but it's not really what I'm suggesting. The separation will still exist, but the unit will be a branch and not a repository. Since branches can be just as independent as repositories it wouldn't really change anything except for convenience in the right places. > > Were it not for the fact that opm-core depends on opm-parser I would > be able to download "only" opm-core and get access to powerful grid > processing routines, an implementation of mimetic discretisations > (somewhat languishing but nevertheless working), partial support for > the multi-scale mixed finite-element method, time-of-flight solvers > based on the reordering technique, explicit and implicit solvers for > two-phase incompressible transport problems. In essence, fundamental > tools for doing simple calculations in porous media applications. git clone -b opm-core github.com:opm-project > > If we renege that ability in order to manufacture a single monolithic > package for black-oil applications, albeit with interesting physical > properties such as polymer and/or thermal effects, then the project > has lost its way. I didn't suggest that at all. > > [...] > >> For reference, the Linux kernel, which is a much larger project than >> opm, only use one repo. > > Clients are expected to use the entire Linux tree as whole when doing > anything with the Linux sources. That assumption doesn't hold in the > case of OPM. The argument was mostly related to size and code management. _______________________________________________ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org<mailto:Opm@opm-project.org> http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm ------------------------------------------------------------------- The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this message. Thank you
_______________________________________________ Opm mailing list Opm@opm-project.org http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm
