Martin Kronbichler

@tamiko @masterleinad I guess we won't be able to finish this today?

Any progress here?

Postponing.

I think having a copy of the triangulation would also solve the problem that #10971 tries to solve, so it would be two birds with one stone.

I would not mind having `shared_ptr` objects for the manifolds rather than `unique_ptr`, but I would like to hear other opinions. What we are discussing here, the requirement stated in...

I think having a short meeting with all people interested would be great to see other opinions on this topic and see how we can set things up and get...

> This has the potential to simplify the current logic quite a bit. But there are still a couple of questions in that regard. The biggest one I am having...

@davydden do you agree to move the target milestone to 9.3 here? Realistically I myself will not have much time to contribute to this issue unless you are highly motivated.

As observed in #12135, we would (also) need a non-templated version that takes `dim` as an argument, possibly in a `constexpr` context to ensure the parts known at compile time...

I agree with this direction; however, I think one could still construct scenarios where one process has all the same same data locally (ind any of those checks) and only...