[Mpi-forum] MPI_WAIT/MPI_TEST and generalized, I/O, and NBC requests

Fab Tillier ftillier at microsoft.com
Tue Feb 14 14:19:15 CST 2012


Rich,

It might be worthwhile to allocate some time for ticket 321 in the agenda - not so much to review the ticket, but to review, clarify, and document the process around this kinds of change.  I believe Rolf suggested a ticket because, like Pavan noted, this is not a case of a 'ticket 0' type change, so should follow our standard process.  However, it is also trivially obvious and the original intent of the text, so I can also see the other side of the argument that we shouldn't waste time at the Forum to review it.

-Fab

Pavan Balaji wrote on Tue, 14 Feb 2012 at 12:03:40

> 
> Can someone clarify what pieces are deemed "chapter committee changes"
> vs. something that requires voting?  My understanding was that
> grammatical errors that do not change the meaning are the chapter
> committee's job.  While this particular change is trivially obvious,
> that doesn't fall into the above set of allowed chapter committee changes.
> 
> In any case, making a decision over email seems ridiculous.  There needs
> to be an official rule for this.  I'm OK with the official rule being
> "the chapter committee decides on whether a change requires a forum vote
> or not".  But collecting preferences over email is a nonsensical way to
> do this.
> 
>   -- Pavan
> On 02/14/2012 01:51 PM, Graham, Richard L. wrote:
>> Chapter committee should be fine - we don't need a change-log for NBC (it
>> is not in a release version of the standard, so no change to log), but have not
>> yet looked at the other two areas.
>> 
>> Rich
>> 
>> On Feb 14, 2012, at 9:43 PM, Torsten Hoefler wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 07:10:42PM +0000, Fab Tillier wrote:
>>>> I made a ticket for this, 321, so I could track it and have a way of
>>>> posting a PDF for folks to take a look (e.g. I'd like the chapter
>>>> authors for NBC, I/O, and generalized requests to agree to the
>>>> wording).  Beyond that, I don't care how this eventually gets checked
>>>> into the approved branch, and am happy just merging it and marking it
>>>> as ticket0 and omitting the changelog entry if that's what folks want.
>>>> 
>>>> So far we have:
>>>> 
>>>> In favor of full ticket:
>>>> - Rolf
>>>> 
>>>> In favor of chapter committee:
>>>> - Bill
>>>> - Dave
>>>> - Bronis
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like to see at least Rich (pt2pt), Torsten (coll), and Rajeev
>>>> (I/O) chime in with their preference.
>>> I already indicated my preference a week ago. I was against a ticket and
>>> pro chapter committee. We should lump this into the bulk ticket-0
>>> tickets we have lying around.
>>> 
>>> Torsten
>>> 
>>> --
>>> bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --------------------- http://www.unixer.de/ -----
>>> Torsten Hoefler         | Performance Modeling and Simulation Lead
>>> Blue Waters Directorate | University of Illinois (UIUC)
>>> 1205 W Clark Street     | Urbana, IL, 61801
>>> NCSA Building           | +01 (217) 244-7736
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mpi-forum mailing list
>>> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpi-forum mailing list
>> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
>





More information about the mpi-forum mailing list