Brian Granzow

This 7547cb2b commit fixed the issue.

At 44ed745f5 with gcc/7.2.0 linking of tests fails with the error: ``` [ 55%] Building CXX object src/CMakeFiles/hypercube_test.dir/hypercube_test.cpp.o cd /scratch/bngranz/nightly/jughead-openmp/build/omega_h/src && /projects/sems/install/rhel6-x86_64/sems/compiler/gcc/7.2.0/openmpi/1.10.1/bin/mpicxx -I/scratch/bngranz/nightly/jughead-openmp/src/omega_h/src -I/scratch/bngranz/nightly/jughead-openmp/build/omega_h/src -fopenmp -W -Wall -Wextra -Werror -std=c++11...

should that be =OFF?

Well, we should definitely fix the warnings that pop up with clang. As for this specific issue, we should either implement a check that the clang version is recent enough,...

Perhaps @mortezah would be the correct person to investigate this issue. @mrasquin Do you have a SHA for core-sim where this feature worked as you expected?

I agree with the apparent need for regression tests for features that appear to be slipping through the cracks. I would just stipulate that the proposed regression tests should take...

Here is the stack trace I get when running the example @mrasquin pointed me to in serial. (i.e. modifying the parameter splitFactor to 1 in adapt.inp) ``` #0 0x00007fffe2edff15 in...

I can only speak for the PUMI discretization, but I'm pretty sure the [owned node](https://github.com/gahansen/Albany/blob/master/src/disc/pumi/Albany_APFDiscretization.cpp#L810), [owned dof](https://github.com/gahansen/Albany/blob/master/src/disc/pumi/Albany_APFDiscretization.cpp#L820), [overlapped node](https://github.com/gahansen/Albany/blob/master/src/disc/pumi/Albany_APFDiscretization.cpp#L844), and [overlapped dof](https://github.com/gahansen/Albany/blob/master/src/disc/pumi/Albany_APFDiscretization.cpp#L845) maps are always contiguous due to the underlying...

A very long time ago, I was interested in putting together some user documentation for my own benefit to help me learn how to use Albany. In particular, as a...

Hi Navid, thanks for the information. Unfortunately, I think it is likely that you haven't actually done anything incorrect, and that this implementation is not actually that robust. My motivation...