Barry Smith <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> writes: > Ok, I think it plus the DMTS are problematically because, frankly, > only you understand them and anything in a package that has subtle > complexities in it that only one person understands is really bad > (you kind of admit this by saying you are the only one who can > really do a new refactorization).
I don't think it's much different from other parts of PETSc. How many people could jump in and refactor PCGAMG or PCFIELDSPLIT or SNESNASM or VecScatter or DMPlex? I think it would take any of us a few hours (or more) of reading, understanding each use case, and sketching how a replacement can provide each of those use cases. This is vulnerable to Second System Syndrome and someone to spend time making a several thousand line patch with sweeping changes that wasn't carefully thought out (and preferably incremental), nor would I want to review such a beast.