Simon, We are planning a new release real soon. I recommend very much tracking petsc-dev, then after the release 2.3.1 you can stick with that for a while (we'll patch problems that come up, but won't be constantly changing things). Barry On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Simon Burton wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 17:49:46 -0600 Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> wrote:
Simon Burton <[email protected]> writes:
This was patched in 2.3.0, but maybe you have an unpatched version. It is easy to check. The symbol comes from
We have been tracking your bitkeeper repository. I don't know if this is sane or not because we want to release something (in a few weeks) and that basically means it is up to us to somehow stabilize PETSc, or at least "bless" some particular version of PETSc.
No, that doesn't sound right either: fixes that you guys make will go into the bk repository, so... I guess what I am asking is, are we just insane to try and do this ? Or, is it possible to maybe branch your repository so we can stabilize PETSc for some kind of beta release ?
Sounds like we just need to make it clear that petsc is on the move and that you guys are completely responsive to bug reports, etc.
We are going to build a "petsc doesn't work" FAQ, but, gee i wish your email list (petsc-maint) was archived somewhere...
If you start getting 10 more support queires a day can you handle that ? What about 50 ? Maybe I can also act as a gateway, if I tell our users to come to me first.
Simon.