"Smith, Barry F. via petsc-maint" <petsc-ma...@mcs.anl.gov> writes:
> Yes you have the history exactly right, but keeping them as independent > beasts seemed/seems impossible; except by doing something very cumbersome > (like shoving all the PCXXX_YYY that depended on KSP into the KSP src > directory). So the "opted" was really forced upon us. We could merge PC and KSP into a single class, perhaps maintaining separate lists by typical "role" (the things we call PC are usually configured to be linear operations while the things we call KSP are iterative). It would be a major change and I'm not suggesting we should, but it would eliminate a lot of duplication and associated controversy.
