I also support keeping UFL separate from FFC. Having a more or less
clean and pure language like UFL will make it easier to reuse for
purposes that don't require or are incompatible with other FEniCS
internals.

I have no opinion on merging ffc with ufc.  

Rob

On Wed, 8 Jan 2014 11:33:48 +0000
David Ham <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>Having discussed this around the Firedrake mob (except Florian who is
>still away), we don't have any objection to UFC going into FFC.
>Indeed, since our FFC branch does indeed have a non-UFC backend, it
>might even make us cleaner and move us towards the point at which we
>can start talking with you about merging our stuff into trunk.
>
>One small issue which will crop up is that FFC uses setuptools while
>UFC has a cmake build process. We would really like a combined package
>to be installable with setuptools (I don't expect this would cause any
>huge issues).
>
>We would be less happy about UFL going into FFC, as we think that
>breaks an important abstraction. We would be really, really unhappy
>about any of the above being merged with Dolfin, as that would give us
>a Dolfin dependency which is really non-trivial. However neither of
>those merges are being proposed right now, so I'm not sure we need to
>have that discussion now.
>
>Regards,
>
>David
>
>
>
>
>
>On 8 January 2014 08:03, Martin Sandve Alnæs <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>  +1 to merging ufc into ffc.
>>
>> I'd rather not merge in ufl (yet).
>>
>> I plan to merge uflacs into ffc at a later date but not yet.
>>
>> It would be nice if we then split out the compiled stuff from ffc
>> into a separate python module and place all python modules from ufc
>> and ffc in a shared src/ or site-packages/ directory, as this makes
>> it easier to add to python path without installation for running
>> tests.
>>
>> Martin
>> 7. jan. 2014 23:23 skrev "Anders Logg" <[email protected]> følgende:
>>
>>  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.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Anders
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> fenics mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
>>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Robert Kirby
Associate Professor
Department of Mathematics
Baylor University
https://bearspace.baylor.edu/Robert_Kirby/www/

"An hour spent in pure thought is not a wasted hour"
-- Life of Fred, Edgewood
_______________________________________________
fenics mailing list
[email protected]
http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics

Reply via email to