No matter what new/better model is being introduced, please also try to make the model as SIMPLE as possible. Below is what I learned from Jed this morning (correct me if I'm wrong):
1. a stable branch of petsc-dev for users 2. a dynamic branch, e.g., named 'next', for group of internal petsc developers 3. private branch for individual project, e.g., I'm currently working on minresqlp with Terrya Choi. For this model, I would appreciate a clear, precise and SHORT instruction on how to do followings: 1. fork a private branch from the stable branch petsc-dev 2. pull/update private branch from stable branch 3. push private change to 'next'. 4. for nightly tests of private development, am I allowed to frequently push changes to 'next'? 5. how a project collaborator, e.g. Terrya clone my private branch and work on it. All for now, Hong On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Karl Rupp <rupp at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Hi Sean, > >>>> Satish, please remove me from petsc-maint. Also, remove me from the >>>> >>>> developers webpage. I have already purged petsc-dev from my system and >>>> won't be pushing anything else from now on. >>> >>> >>> Huh, why this? This is not forced change of religion... >> >> >> Why should I bother? Everyone will listen to Jed anyway. Sorry about the >> CUDA+cmake patches, by the way, those are gone now. > > > it will still be possible to work with Mercurial. The need for a new/better > development model was also based on stability issues repeatedly raised by > users at SIAM CSE, as you certainly remember. > The decision followed a technical evaluation of the workflow, not on a > 'Sean vs. Jed'-type of personal preference. Thus, you really should not take > this personal. > > Best regards, > Karli >
