On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 20:19, Sean Farley <sean@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

Since AR Jed felt we should change the name of include/private (and I agree it was appropriate) shouldn't we also change the name of include/finclude? It has the same problem of pollution when dumped in a --prefix location.

Should it be petsc-fortran? Or petsc-fortran-include?

You can call PETSc from fortran? How quaint! How about include/petsc-quaint?

I would call it petsc-fortran if we are going to rename it. It's not a conflict per se since the headers inside finclude/ are still namespaced. It also impacts normal Fortran users which the private rename does not. I don't feel strongly either way about doing the rename. We should probably start recommending the use of modules instead of the #include stuff that is currently required.