Delaying the release is unlikely to get that I/O “fixed” faster so I don’t want to block on it.
If the “fixes” for the I/O don’t require current API changes (but could require some new functions) then it is reasonable to include them as in a “patch” release so it need not wait for a full release. If the I/O requires total restructuring then I guess you stuck working off master for the new I/O until the next release. We’ve been over a year since a release which is too long. Barry On Jun 8, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Blaise A Bourdin <bour...@lsu.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > I hate to be the party pooper, especially when I don’t have code to > contribute, but I/O with DMComplex is still far from release ready. Is it > reasonable that having functional I/O in a stable release is going to wait > until 3.6? > > I still can’t figure out how to deal with cell sets of different types (say > quads and tri). > All cell and vertex sets seem to be contained in the hdf5 file, but not in a > way that is usable by post processing tools (visit, paraview, ensight). > The xdmf generation script bin/pythonscripts/petsc_gen_xdmf.py is quite > fragile. > > I understand that it is probably too late to get this fixed and tested in > 3.5. What is the best course of action? > > Blaise > >> >> We’ll be making a PETSc release in a few days so please get anything you >> need into next for testing and movement over to master. >> >> Barry >> >> Tentative plan for release Wed June 11 >> > > -- > Department of Mathematics and Center for Computation & Technology > Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA > Tel. +1 (225) 578 1612, Fax +1 (225) 578 4276 > http://www.math.lsu.edu/~bourdin > > > > > > >