On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:23 PM, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
Many "small" changes is not optimal, but I don't think it will be a big problem. Johannes _______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
