[Mpi3-rma] MPI-3.0 Errata tickets in RMA chapter

[Jim Dinan]

Sounds good to me.

Jeff, is this ok?  If so, let me know when the new type is available and 
I'll update my tickets.

  ~Jim.

On 1/9/13 10:09 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> as a new type, i would propose to use only "correction as errata",
> and I would propose to still tell the number in the title,
> i.e.,
> Title: MPI-3.0 errata: xxxxxxxxxxx
> Type: Correction (as errata)
>
> Okay?
>
> Less is to risky as I learnt in the past years.
> The type should not include a number.
> It must be clear how far backward an errata is going.
> At the end some people have to go through all tickets,
> and then the title is important.
>
> If you say yes, then I would directly ask Jeff to
> introduce the new type that you can procede.
> Currently, you may have the most errata tickets.
>
> Best regards
> Rolf
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Dinan" <dinan at mcs.anl.gov>
>> To: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner at hlrs.de>
>> Cc: "MPI 3.0 Remote Memory Access working group" <mpi3-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org>, "Martin Schulz" <schulzm at llnl.gov>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 4:47:30 PM
>> Subject: Re: MPI-3.0 Errata tickets in RMA chapter
>> Hi Rolf,
>>
>> Thanks for taking the time to look through these tickets. The RMA WG
>> is
>> planning to handle these as MPI-3 errata in the next meeting. Instead
>> of marking this in the ticket title, can we instead add a "type" for
>> "MPI 3.0 Errata" (these are currently listed as "Correction to
>> standard"). This would make it easier to pick out such items in a
>> query.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ~Jim.
>>
>> On 1/9/13 4:00 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote:
>>> Jim and all,
>>>
>>> I expect that you may want to handle the tickets
>>> #347, #348, #350, and #355 as MPI-3.0 errata.
>>>
>>> For this, the most simplest is to add "MPI-3.0 Errata:" at the
>>> beginning of your ticket title.
>>> I did this in #345. It passed at the Dec. 2012 meeting.
>>>
>>> You should pass such errata as fast as possible, probably in
>>> the next meeting.
>>>
>>> I do not know whether ticket #346 is an errata (i.e., clarification
>>> or correction of a wrong, inconsistent or missing definition)
>>> or a new feature.
>>>
>>> As usual at the end, I'll put all the errata in a separate section
>>> in MPI-next, as I did in MPI-3.0 B.1.1.
>>> Therefore I prefer to have such a clean visibility in the title.
>>> The method we used in MPI-3.0 was too dangerous (we oversaw them for
>>> an extremely long time).
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Rolf
>>>
>