Update Discourse data data [skip ci]

Author: precice-bot

assets/data/faq.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "source": "preCICE Discourse (FAQ)",
-  "generated_at": "2026-05-16T07:59:40.561908",
+  "generated_at": "2026-05-17T08:16:56.575844",
   "topics": [
     {
       "id": 44,
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
       "url": "https://precice.discourse.group/t/restarting-coupled-fsi-simulation-with-precice/117",
       "created_at": "2019-12-06T09:10:16.329Z",
       "last_posted_at": "2024-07-03T15:56:51.883Z",
-      "views": 2393,
+      "views": 2394,
       "posts_count": 11,
       "like_count": 5,
       "excerpt": "Dear all,\nI am trying to validate my fluid and structure mesh for the FSI1 case of cylinder-flap test. As the refinement of the fluid and structure mesh increases, it is difficult for implicit FSI coupling to converge. Therefore, my idea is to use a \u2026"
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@
       "views": 506,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "Or: Can preCICE interpolate between an arbitrary / unstructured mesh and a regular / structured mesh?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 55,
@@ -240,7 +240,7 @@
       "views": 478,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "I always hear that monolithic coupling is the only way to go, as partitioned coupling introduces error. Is this correct?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 54,
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@
       "views": 518,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "Can the individual solvers run on two different platforms on two different machines in/out of a network?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 52,
@@ -264,7 +264,7 @@
       "views": 519,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "Which code is executing the coupling iterations given that preCICE does not really have a centralized engine to orchestrate the simulation?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 26,
@@ -276,7 +276,7 @@
       "views": 592,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "How do you test preCICE and its official adapters?\nCan I trust you?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 50,
@@ -288,7 +288,7 @@
       "views": 849,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "There are multiple OpenFOAM \u201cvariants\u201d, including openfoam.com, openfoam.org, and the early fork foam-extend. Which versions of them are compatible?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 43,
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@
       "views": 1010,
       "posts_count": 3,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "Marta asked on the mailing list (March 28, 2019)\n\nI\u2019m using preCICE to couple two codes: the lattice Boltzmann code LUMIS and OpenFOAM. LUMIS has a time step 10 times smaller than OpenFOAM so during the coupling LUMIS subcycles before exchanging data\u2026"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 29,
@@ -312,7 +312,7 @@
       "views": 822,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "My solver offers adaptive mesh refinement.\nCan I use this with preCICE?"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 38,
@@ -336,7 +336,7 @@
       "views": 757,
       "posts_count": 7,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "We had a good discussion with Satish on the mailing list about the re-partitioning process and the connection to parallel data mapping in preCICE.\nSatish asked (July 24, 2019):\n\nIt seems to me that mappings can occur in parallel in preCICE. Is that c\u2026"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 41,
@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@
       "views": 750,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 2,
-      "excerpt": "Nikrouz asked on the mailing list (Sep 13, 2019):\n\nI am going to use OpenFoam-CalculiX for FSI simulations.\nAt this time, I am have technical question for preparing preCICE config file. The case I am going to run has very large deformations. Fortunat\u2026"
+      "excerpt": ""
     },
     {
       "id": 36,
@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@
       "views": 647,
       "posts_count": 2,
       "like_count": 0,
-      "excerpt": "The OpenFOAM adapter has the form of an OpenFOAM function object. This mechanism is commonly used only for post-processing, so a reasonable question is:\n\nDoes the OpenFOAM adapter also take care of the checkpointing? In other words, can a function ob\u2026"
+      "excerpt": ""
     }
   ]
 }

assets/data/news.json

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 {
-  "generated_at": "2026-05-16T07:59:34.461429",
+  "generated_at": "2026-05-17T08:16:53.395762",
   "topics": [
     {
       "id": 217,
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
       "last_posted_at": "2026-04-23T10:59:00.361Z",
       "like_count": 9,
       "posts_count": 1,
-      "views": 106,
+      "views": 110,
       "description": "Summary: With preCICE v3.4, we pushed features on several fronts. We made quasi-Newton acceleration bounds-aware as a first step toward fully supporting bounded coupling variables, such as density or volume..."
     },
     {
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
       "last_posted_at": "2026-04-13T12:16:37.039Z",
       "like_count": 6,
       "posts_count": 3,
-      "views": 80,
+      "views": 81,
       "description": "In October 5-9, 2026, we are organizing the first online preCICE training, mainly targeting participants in the US, Canada, and Latin America (time: 12\u20133 pm EDT (UTC-4)) that cannot easily..."
     },
     {
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@
       "last_posted_at": "2025-10-22T10:52:31.506Z",
       "like_count": 7,
       "posts_count": 4,
-      "views": 340,
+      "views": 342,
       "description": "Dear preCICE community, Some of you are already experimenting with just\u2011in\u2011time data mapping and other features introduced in preCICE v3.2. In my recently completed thesis, Flexible mesh\u2011particle coupling with preCICE,..."
     },
     {