Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Temperature strategy needs more explanation #400

Closed
rrgrove6 opened this issue May 23, 2015 · 5 comments
Closed

Temperature strategy needs more explanation #400

rrgrove6 opened this issue May 23, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@rrgrove6
Copy link
Contributor

In the "Parameters in section mesh refinement" (believed to be 5.59) of the manual, under parameter name: strategy, there was a request from Shangxin to elaborate the 'temperature' strategy.

Him and I think that it is too brief comapred to the others and could use a little more explanation as to what it does.

@bangerth
Copy link
Contributor

Patch would of course be very welcome! The text comes from source/mesh_refinement/temperature.cc. There are likely other mesh refinement strategies with similar deficiencies. The text is indeed very short.

@bangerth bangerth added this to the 1.4 milestone Feb 3, 2016
@bangerth bangerth modified the milestones: 1.5, 1.4 Jun 24, 2016
@gassmoeller
Copy link
Member

This was not put forward for a long time. I will close it for now. Feel free to fix it any time.

@bangerth
Copy link
Contributor

bangerth commented May 7, 2018

@Shangxin-Liu 's observation is not wrong -- we should document this better.

@gassmoeller
Copy link
Member

Thanks for fixing this! I was not implying this issue would be wrong, merely that it was open for 3 years without being important enough to be fixed. We have a number of 'nice to have' issues that have not been addressed for a long time, and they distract from more important bugs. Some github projects have a policy about how to handle 'stale' issues (e.g. close them 6 months after the last comment was made if it is not clear who is working on this), just to keep the list up to date. Maybe we can have a discussion at the hackathon about how we want to handle these cases.

@bangerth
Copy link
Contributor

bangerth commented May 7, 2018

You did entirely the right thing when you close the issue -- nothing was forthcoming. I just thought I should spend a 5-minute hole on something like this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants