Benjamin Rodenberg

Accidentally pushed [ee153fa](https://github.com/precice/precice/pull/2005/commits/ee153faa08530c21618bdb63b9569e877cce666f) and the merge to `develop` [675554b](https://github.com/precice/precice/pull/2005/commits/675554bab4a289c36cbc8e94047ff2b01f5ee0f3) to this branch. Originally wanted to push it on my own copy of this branch (https://github.com/BenjaminRodenberg/precice/tree/new-QNWR). I hope this is no...

Hi! What's the status for this PR? I'm planning to perform some experiments using the partitioned heat equation + this PR and compare to the results from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/nme.6443 next week....

I introduced a bug via [f66061a](https://github.com/precice/precice/pull/2005/commits/f66061a511bc740066f71dc80084ce1b9174ac09): ```diff - const size_t primaryDataSize = std::accumulate(_primaryDataIDs.begin(), _primaryDataIDs.end(), (size_t) 0, [&](size_t val, int id) { return val + _primaryTimeGrids.getTimeGrid(id).size() * cplData.at(id)->getSize(); }); - const...

I repeated the experiments from the [QNWI paper](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/nme.6443) using the code from this PR and got the following results:  Some comments: * I skipped QN-WI. IIRC we are currently...

To contribute some internal information here: We use `-1` as a sentinel value for "no time window size defined". Therefore, providing `value="-1"` with `method="first-participant"` is technically valid, but very confusing...

I just realized that the mapping configuration is still insufficient after ade92c1. But this is maybe a different issue?

Do you think you could come up with an integration test for a similar case? The multi coupling scheme is not very well tested anyway and with additional data initialization...

There are often rather ranges of compatible versions. To some degree this is covered by semantic versioning already, but one might also need `` or ``. I think this is...

Hi, we already discussed this issue previously in https://github.com/precice/precice/issues/127 and decided to make it a `wontfix`. I also stumbled across this issue when trying to use a python-based xml parser....

What's holding us back? I just reviewed #541 and was also a bit surprised about the `pyprecice==3`. In #541 we will keep it consistent with the rest and merge now.