On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017, Satish Balay wrote:
> $ git fetch -p && comm -12 <(git branch -r --merged origin/next-tmp | sort)
> <(git branch -r --no-merged origin/master | sort)
> origin/hongzh/add-tstraj-filename
merged to master
> origin/hongzh/copy_l2
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017, Richard Tran Mills wrote:
>
> > Hi Satish,
> >
> > Thanks for taking the initiative to switch to testing next-tmp to help
> > clear up the constipation with moving things into master. It looks like
> > there hasn't been
Satish Balay writes:
>> origin/jed/variadic-malloc
>
> http://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/2017/11/11/filtered-make_next-tmp_arch-mswin-uni_ps4.log
> C:\cygwin64\home\petsc\PETSC~3.CLO\src\vec\is\utils\vsectionis.c(2380):
> warning C4090: 'function': different 'const' qualifie
Matthew Knepley writes:
>> Alternative is to delete/recreate next - if needed. [but it requires
>> all next users to do this delete/recreation]
>>
>> In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
>
>
> 1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up (witness
> next)
Agree.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Vaclav Hapla writes:
>
> >> 10. 11. 2017 v 5:09, Smith, Barry F. :
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Nov 8, 2017, at 3:52 AM, Vaclav Hapla
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> 8. 11. 2017 v 9:06, Lisandro Dalcin :
>
> On 8 November 2017 at 05:51, Smith
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> > In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
>
>
> 1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up (witness
> next)
>
> 2) I think we are actually finding interaction bugs there.
>
> Are those points wrong, or is there anoth
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> > > In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
> >
> >
> > 1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up (witness
> > next)
> >
> > 2) I think we are actually finding
Matthew Knepley writes:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>
>> > > In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
>> >
>> >
>> > 1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up (witness
>> > next)
>> >
>>
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> >
> > > > In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
> > >
> > >
> > > 1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up (
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Satish Balay
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> > >
> > > > > In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
> > > >
> >
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> > I don't think we have the resources to run full tests on every branch one
> > at a time. Do we?
>
> No,
Well the hope is - after the migration to new test suite is complete
the cost of a full test run is lower. And we could somehow do fewer
tests to capt
Matthew Knepley writes:
>> Matrix and graph are equivalent concepts.
>
>
> This is clearly wrong. A matrix is the coordinate representation of a
> linear operator, and thus has a specific
> behavior under coordinate transformations. A graph is just connectivity,
> and really just a relation. I ca
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Matthew Knepley writes:
>
> >> Matrix and graph are equivalent concepts.
> >
> >
> > This is clearly wrong. A matrix is the coordinate representation of a
> > linear operator, and thus has a specific
> > behavior under coordinate transformation
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> >
> > BTW: Ultimlately if you want to improve current next model - everyone
> > has to do a 'make alltests DIFF=$PETSC_DIR/bin/petscdiff' for atleast
> > one build that has relavent feature options enabled - before merging
> > the feature branch to nex
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> > I don't think we have the resources to run full tests on every branch one
>> > at a time. Do we?
>>
>> No,
>
> Well the hope is - after the migration to new test suite is complete
> the cost of a full test run is lower. And we c
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> > >
> > > BTW: Ultimlately if you want to improve current next model - everyone
> > > has to do a 'make alltests DIFF=$PETSC_DIR/bin/petscdiff' for atleast
> > > one build that has relavent feat
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> Satish Balay writes:
>
> > On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> >
> >> > I don't think we have the resources to run full tests on every branch one
> >> > at a time. Do we?
> >>
> >> No,
> >
> > Well the hope is - after the migration to new test suite i
Matthew Knepley writes:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> Matthew Knepley writes:
>>
>> >> Matrix and graph are equivalent concepts.
>> >
>> >
>> > This is clearly wrong. A matrix is the coordinate representation of a
>> > linear operator, and thus has a specific
>> > beh
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
> And that makes my point. The time for me to login to cg, set
> everything up, and run the tests should be automated, and in fact we
> already did that for next, which is what should be used.
You can automate an ssh command run a test on cg - [if you
Matthew Knepley writes:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>
>> > >
>> > > BTW: Ultimlately if you want to improve current next model - everyone
>> > > has to do a 'make alltests DIFF=$PETSC_DIR/bin/petscdiff' for atleast
>> >
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> Matthew Knepley writes:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
> >
> >> Matthew Knepley writes:
> >>
> >> >> Matrix and graph are equivalent concepts.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This is clearly wrong. A matrix is the coordinate rep
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> Satish Balay writes:
>>
>> > On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>> >
>> >> > I don't think we have the resources to run full tests on every branch
>> >> > one
>> >> > at a time. Do we?
>> >>
>> >> No,
>> >
>> > Well the hope
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> Merging is synchronous. If I do
>
> git checkout master
> git pull
> git merge jed/risky-business
> make alltests # works on my machine
Note: this is my recommendation for the *currentK next model.
If you are running 'make alltests' on your
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
>> And that makes my point. The time for me to login to cg, set
>> everything up, and run the tests should be automated, and in fact we
>> already did that for next, which is what should be used.
>
> You can automate an ssh com
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>>
>> Merging is synchronous. If I do
>>
>> git checkout master
>> git pull
>> git merge jed/risky-business
>> make alltests # works on my machine
>
> Note: this is my recommendation for the *currentK next model.
>
> If y
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> > The way I see it - a broken next [where folks can't easily figure out
> > who or which commit is responsible for the brakages] - doesn't help
> > much..
>
> The fundamental problem here is that we aren't accurate enough at
> placing blame and getting the
Matthew Knepley writes:
>> >> A graph Laplacian certainly does transform under coordinate
>> >> transformation and indeed, we use that property to design effective
>> >> coarsening strategies. That one basis strikes you as intrinsically
>> >> "more canonical" does not mean it isn't a linear oper
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> > If you are running 'make alltests' on your laptop - then you don't need to
> > test on es - before merge to maint.
>
> alltests takes hours and doesn't catch weird configurations -- you need
> different PETSC_ARCH for that. It is normal to at least comp
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> > The way I see it - a broken next [where folks can't easily figure out
>> > who or which commit is responsible for the brakages] - doesn't help
>> > much..
>>
>> The fundamental problem here is that we aren't accurate enough at
>
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> > If you are running 'make alltests' on your laptop - then you don't need to
>> > test on es - before merge to maint.
>>
>> alltests takes hours and doesn't catch weird configurations -- you need
>> different PETSC_ARCH for that.
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> >> I think a lot of our noise in 'next' is "stupid shit", like compilation
> >> failing on some architecture. Automating a very limited test suite
> >> running on PRs within minutes should help a lot to deal with that. More
> >> subtle interaction problems
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> The proposal I'm objecting to, and that has prevented me from writing an
> important letter of recommendation this morning during some precious
> time while Joule is sleeping, was to eliminate 'next'. We wouldn't have
> needed to exchange dozens of emails i
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 11:17 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2017, Richard Tran Mills wrote:
>
> > Hi Satish,
> >
> > Thanks for taking the initiative to switch to testing next-tmp to help
> > clear up the constipation wit
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
> > > In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
> >
> >
> > 1) I think next really prevents master from getting screwed up
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> Matthew Knepley writes:
>
>>> Alternative is to delete/recreate next - if needed. [but it requires
>>> all next users to do this delete/recreation]
>>>
>>> In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
>>
>>
>> 1) I think next real
There is no reason to waste time protesting the attempt to change to the new
model. The attempt will happen as soon as we have the new test harness fully
working. So help out or get out of the way.
Barry
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 12:06 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed B
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 11:49 AM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> Matthew Knepley writes:
>
>> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Satish Balay wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>>
> In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next..
1) I think next really p
Jed wrote (with my ())
I'm sure I'm not the only one in a similar situation. We need an
effective set of tests that runs in less than five minutes (on all systems with
all compilers) so that we
can fix problems and move on rather than having lots of open threads
hanging around.
Sure, this
"Smith, Barry F." writes:
>> On Nov 11, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Jed Brown wrote:
>>
>> Matthew Knepley writes:
>>
Alternative is to delete/recreate next - if needed. [but it requires
all next users to do this delete/recreation]
In the long term - Barry wants to get rid of next
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 3:20 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> "Smith, Barry F." writes:
>
>>> On Nov 11, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Jed Brown wrote:
>>>
>>> Matthew Knepley writes:
>>>
> Alternative is to delete/recreate next - if needed. [but it requires
> all next users to do this delete/recreati
Satish Balay writes:
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> >> I think a lot of our noise in 'next' is "stupid shit", like compilation
>> >> failing on some architecture. Automating a very limited test suite
>> >> running on PRs within minutes should help a lot to deal with that. More
>>
"Smith, Barry F." writes:
>There is no reason to waste time protesting the attempt to change
>to the new model. The attempt will happen as soon as we have the
>new test harness fully working. So help out or get out of the way.
I can't help convert tests if I'm busy arguing against a
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> Removing next without a reliable substitute that ensures quality control
> would be a disaster for the stability of 'master', and thus for everyone
> trying to develop new features. That's what we had before switching to
> Git and it was a mess.
Sorry if I
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> "Smith, Barry F." writes:
>
>> There is no reason to waste time protesting the attempt to change
>> to the new model. The attempt will happen as soon as we have the
>> new test harness fully working. So help out or get out of the way.
Let's please all stop wasting time arguing about next! We can argue when
there is something to argue about. Not now.
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Balay, Satish wrote:
>
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
>
>> Removing next without a reliable substitute that ensures quality control
On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> Satish Balay writes:
>
> > On Sat, 11 Nov 2017, Jed Brown wrote:
> >
> >> >> I think a lot of our noise in 'next' is "stupid shit", like compilation
> >> >> failing on some architecture. Automating a very limited test suite
> >> >> running on PRs within m
"Smith, Barry F." writes:
> Jed wrote (with my ())
>
> I'm sure I'm not the only one in a similar situation. We need an
> effective set of tests that runs in less than five minutes (on all systems
> with all compilers) so that we
> can fix problems and move on rather than having lots of open
"Smith, Barry F." writes:
>You are arguing against a change in the abstract because you love
>next! You are making up stray men and attacking them. Wait until
>there is a real proposal then point out flaws and make suggestions
>on how to improve it. There is no reason to develop t
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 3:49 PM, Jed Brown wrote:
>
> "Smith, Barry F." writes:
>
>> You are arguing against a change in the abstract because you love
>> next! You are making up stray men and attacking them. Wait until
>> there is a real proposal then point out flaws and make suggestions
[Starting a new thread for this]
Tonight's builds will be on 'next-tmp' with:
$ git fetch -p && comm -12 <(git branch -r --merged origin/next-tmp | sort)
<(git branch -r --no-merged origin/master | sort) |grep -v ' origin/next-tmp'
origin/barry/add-bcaste-log
origin/barry/fix-pastix-interfac
50 matches
Mail list logo
