John Stilley

> The coverage report doesn't seem right again. I'm seeing the same coverage report results over several PRs. Something is fishy with coveralls. Any ideas? Fixed.

To be clear, the reason I haven't tried to merge this is that we are currently in a code freeze. I am not ignoring you.

@albeanth This PR is getting a bit old; there are a bunch of conflicts. Also, we should move the release note from `0.2.9` to `0.3.1`.

@keckler @albeanth Okay, I understand this file is mostly empty. And I would like to remove it. I can only find one place where this stub is used downstream, and...

@keckler As we are going to move the entire `latticePhysics` package out of ARMI, I am not so concerned about the second stub you mention.

1. There are some merge conflicts in this branch. 2. Why is this PR on "Draft"? That's not a usual workflow in ARMI.

@cbroman-usnctech I would just remove that one string from that line of code. Do you want to open a PR for it, or should I?

ARMI was developed with sodium-cooled fast reactors and molten salt reactors as its primary users. Thus, ARMI has some lingering assumptions that work best for those reactors. We would like...

Okay, I still think this is important. The problem I'm having is Identifying WHERE in the code base (exactly) we are using jagged arrays. Without a full listing of exactly...

Oh, I just found we already had a ticket for this: #246 So, I will close this ticket as duplicate.