[Mpi-forum] MPI-3 svn branch does not build
wgropp at illinois.edu
Wed Dec 5 19:44:28 CST 2012
I'll say it again: the markup approach that we used for MPI 2.1 and 2.2 was never appropriate to 3.0 and it was, in my opinion, a mistake that has cost us time and accuracy, since it often obscures the overall picture of the changes in preference for micro updates. The issue is not so much whether we should strip out the markup, its whether we want to continue with the current failed approach (strip out the 3.0 markup, then insert 3.1 markup that will have the same problems), or return to the update-by-chapter approach that worked for 1.0 and 2.0.
Director, Parallel Computing Institute
Deputy Director for Research
Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies
Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
On Dec 5, 2012, at 7:09 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Is it time to strip all the MPI-3.0 change markup?
> On Dec 5, 2012, at 4:37 PM, William Gropp wrote:
>> This is a known problem - the overuse of change markers is the problem. The general make target builds the most marked up version of the standard, which at this point is unbuildable. As that includes only the document for review and editing, this hasn't been fixed or changed.
>> I will once again put in my plea for sensible edits and markup in the chapters, not the mark-every-single-change-to-whitespace-or-commas approach that we have been taking. Chapter committees should be formed, they should update a chapter, then provide a diff. Anyone who reflows text, thus making the diff harder, should be expelled.
>> William Gropp
>> Director, Parallel Computing Institute
>> Deputy Director for Research
>> Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies
>> Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science
>> University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 4:46 PM, Pavan Balaji wrote:
>>> I tried building this branch:
>>> When I do "make", it doesn't build correctly. "make cleandoc" works fine.
>>> Should we be using a copy of this branch for future changes (e.g.,
>>> errata, etc.)?
>>> -- Pavan
>>> Pavan Balaji
>>> mpi-forum mailing list
>>> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
>> mpi-forum mailing list
>> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquyres at cisco.com
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> mpi-forum mailing list
> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
More information about the mpi-forum