Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

These issues could also have a special milestone like "future". The issue list allows filtering per milestone (= or !=). Vaclav On 20 Jun 2020, at 19:09, Barry Smith mailto:bsm...@petsc.dev>> wrote: I'm leaning to Vaclav's proposal, but with multiple issues, running in the PETSc

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

I'm leaning to Vaclav's proposal, but with multiple issues, running in the PETSc repository as Jed suggested. My concern about the clutter of issues is outweighed by Jed's statement of having the history in one place (current PETSc repository) and Jacob's observation we can cleanly do links

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

The mailing list sounds a perfect option. Thanks, Fande, On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 10:49 PM Jed Brown wrote: > I would prefer this mailing list or GitLab issues because they are > > 1. genuinely open to external participants, > 2. more async-friendly for those in different timezones and folks

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

"Hapla Vaclav" writes: > OK, but you just enabled it, didn't you? When I look at whatever issue, it is > disabled and still I get all notifications. I didn't change it; I'm usually subscribed due to being an integrator. Perhaps your "watch" setting overrides the notifications toggle (report

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

If we go with the multiple issues (in the same or a different repository) I would create an email filter that directed all the email notifications about those issues into their own mail box. I currently have petsc-users, petsc-pipeline, petsc-gitlab, petsc-maint, and petsc-dev mailboxes

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

On 19 Jun 2020, at 20:39, j...@jedbrown.org wrote: I'd expect we'd have a handful of issues with a common label. Easy to customize notifications. Notification scope is either global, group or

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

The Gitlab wiki (on whichever repo) might also be a good complement to whichever thread-based option is used. schrieb am Fr. 19. Juni 2020 um 20:39: > I'd expect we'd have a handful of issues with a common label. Easy to > customize notifications. I don't see the point of a special repository >

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

I'd expect we'd have a handful of issues with a common label. Easy to customize notifications. I don't see the point of a special repository except that it becomes less discoverable.On Jun 19, 2020 12:25, Hapla Vaclav wrote: Why not have a separate project within the same group 

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

Why not have a separate project within the same group https://gitlab.com/petsc? That would allow separate notification settings, for instance. Or the GitLab's Snippets feature mentioned by Jacob - I can imagine they might be confusing within the current repo if they would refer to a future API.

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

GitLab has Epics for managing related issues (we'd have to request community project status to activate it). I don't know if that feature helps facilitate what you envision. If using present features, I would have one outline issue and an issue for each major component. I'd rather not create a new

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

We could create a new empty repository just to use the issue tracker, then we could have the discussion in multiple issues. (having links to PETSc code etc would then require full paths). Each design topic, of which there will be dozens, would get its own issue and new topics are trivial

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

And the monolithic/single issue aka#360 is very slow to access/browse.. Satish On Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Jacob Faibussowitsch wrote: > > I think a special GitLab issue (something akin #360 CI Tracker) would do > > the job quite nicely. > I agree more with this. This also allows you to immediately

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

> I think a special GitLab issue (something akin #360 CI Tracker) would do the > job quite nicely. I agree more with this. This also allows you to immediately see the list of linked MR’s and issues right in the conversation, as well as being able to link code snippets. One gripe however is that

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

I like Slack but it does NOT have the full history in the free plan - it's limited to 10k messages. I think a special GitLab issue (something akin #360 CI Tracker) would do the job quite nicely. Vaclav > On 19 Jun 2020, at 06:48, Jed Brown wrote: > > I would prefer this mailing list or

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

I would prefer this mailing list or GitLab issues because they are 1. genuinely open to external participants, 2. more async-friendly for those in different timezones and folks with young kids, and 3. searchable and externally linkable (e.g., from merge requests and issues) If we need

Re: [petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

A dedicated mailing list has all these functionalities and is easier to see discussion threads. --Junchao Zhang On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 9:27 PM Barry Smith wrote: > >I'd like to start a discussion of PETSc 4.0 aka the Grand > Refactorization but to have that discussion we need to discuss

[petsc-dev] Prediscusion of appropriate communication tool for discussion of PETSc 4 aka the Grand Refactorization

I'd like to start a discussion of PETSc 4.0 aka the Grand Refactorization but to have that discussion we need to discuss what tool to use for that discussion. So this discussion is not about PETSc 4.0, please don't discuss it here. What do people recommend to use for the discussion