[Mpi-forum] September MPI Forum / Agenda and Reminder to Register
schulzm at llnl.gov
Tue Sep 2 18:44:40 CDT 2014
I found the same things confusing (for a reading) as Jeff. Nevertheless,
it may be good to add this to agenda to discuss the two options, unless
you want to lead that discussion yourself next time.
Martin Schulz, schulzm at llnl.gov, http://scalability.llnl.gov/
CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
On 9/2/14, 3:30 PM, "Balaji, Pavan" <balaji at anl.gov> wrote:
>On Sep 2, 2014, at 5:27 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres at cisco.com>
>> On Sep 2, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Balaji, Pavan <balaji at anl.gov> wrote:
>>> The text has a single combined version. There’s no two options in the
>> From 411:
>> "Proposed Solution:
>> Two possible solutions are being proposed:
>> • We reserve the "mpi_" namespace and forbid implementations from
>>using keys in that name space.
>> • Solution 1 + we rename existing info keys to start with "mpi_" and
>>deprecate the older info key names.
>> The attached PDF provides solution 2, but it can easily be modified to
>>solution 1 by simply dropping some changes, since solution 1 is a proper
>>subset of solution 2. Specifically, the only change for solution 1 will
>>be the one sentence addition on the first page of Chapter 9 (page 365)."
>> Does your PDF not agree with your ticket text?
>> That is most confusing.
>OK. The pdf is OK, but I’ll update the ticket text.
>>>> +1. It looks like you missed the deadline due to inactivity.
>>> Did I miss an email asking for tickets to be listed? I thought we
>>>just upload the document on the ticket, which I did over a month ago.
>>>But I don’t want to fight for it. If folks feel this can’t be a formal
>>>reading in September, we can do this in December.
>> Per the rules document:
>> "General text proposals use the following process to be accepted into
>> standards document:
>> 1. Have a formal reading at a physical MPI Forum meeting where the
>> quorum has been met.
>> (a) The final text of the proposal to be read must be made publicly
>> available via the general MPI Forum broadcast email list at least
>> two weeks prior to the start date of the physical MPI Forum meeting
>> at which it is to be formally read."
>> I don't see an email from you on the mpi-forum mailing list announcing
>>411 until today.
>OK, thanks. I’ll keep that in mind for the future.
> — Pavan
>Pavan Balaji ✉️
>mpi-forum mailing list
>mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
More information about the mpi-forum