[Mpi-forum] Time To Open Source MPI

Mon Feb 3 14:06:18 CST 2020

Wesley,

I do not have a strong opinion on this question. However, you keep 
mentioning that the testing infrastructure is broken. I wasn't at the 
last meeting so I must have missed the discussion there. How would 
moving to a repo restore the testing infrastucture?

Cheers
Joseph

On 2/3/20 8:59 PM, Wesley Bland via mpi-forum wrote:
> I really want to emphasize how little work this should be for each 
> person. For people with lots of PRs (like you), I estimate it’ll be less 
> than 15 minutes before the meeting and less than 15 minutes afterward. 
> For people with no open pull requests, it’s 0 minutes. If people are 
> having trouble, I can do “almost” everything for you (other than 
> clicking the delete and fork buttons). I’m asking for help here because 
> I’d rather make a small amount for a handful of people instead of a lot 
> of work for just me. This is also one of the reasons I want to do this 
> in person, so I can help those having trouble.
> 
> The reason we want to do it now is because this only became a problem at 
> the last meeting when we broke the testing infrastructure. We could keep 
> pushing this back, but in the meantime, we won’t be getting the benefit 
> of that testing that we’ve relied on for a while to help make sure that 
> Bill has an easier time of merging our pull requests (which will be even 
> more important as we start to finish up these votes).
> 
> We didn’t make this decision just to give people more work and I spent a 
> fair amount of time making this as painless for everyone as possible. 
> However, unlike some of the other transitions that we’ve made in the 
> past(e.g. SVN -> Git), we also didn’t have the benefit of a long run-up 
> to make this change.
> 
> Thanks,
> Wesley
> 
>> On Feb 3, 2020, at 1:36 PM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk 
>> <mailto:d.holmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Wesley,
>>
>>> This change really won’t be as painful as it sounds
>>
>> Then why do I have to do a bunch of unexpected/unscheduled backup and 
>> book-keeping work before an arbitrarily chosen deadline? I’m not sure 
>> that springing this surprise on folks is the wisest course of action.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dan.
>> —
>> Dr Daniel Holmes PhD
>> Architect (HPC Research)
>> d.holmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk <mailto:d.holmes at epcc.ed.ac.uk>
>> Phone: +44 (0) 131 651 3465
>> Mobile: +44 (0) 7940 524 088
>> Address: Room 2.09, Bayes Centre, 47 Potterrow, Central Area, 
>> Edinburgh, EH8 9BT
>> —
>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in 
>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>> —
>>
>>> On 3 Feb 2020, at 16:02, Wesley Bland via mpi-forum 
>>> <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org 
>>> <mailto:mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Because in the meantime, our testing remains broken and we don’t have 
>>> another solution to fix it at the moment. We really want to have that 
>>> testing fix.
>>>
>>> This change really won’t be as painful as it sounds. There’s almost 
>>> no Git commands required. No rebasing/merging/etc.
>>>
>>>> On Feb 3, 2020, at 9:57 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner <rabenseifner at hlrs.de 
>>>> <mailto:rabenseifner at hlrs.de>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why aren't we doing this when we finished 4.0, i.e. merged all the 
>>>> voted in
>>>> pull requests into the standard?
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org 
>>>>> <mailto:mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>>
>>>>> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org 
>>>>> <mailto:mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>>
>>>>> Cc: "Wesley Bland" <work at wesbland.com <mailto:work at wesbland.com>>
>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 4:38:48 PM
>>>>> Subject: [Mpi-forum] Time To Open Source MPI
>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> ** Look at the numbered list for your action items before 
>>>>> 2020-02-18! **
>>>>>
>>>>> Since we moved from Subversion to GitHub, there’s been a back and 
>>>>> forth on
>>>>> whether the MPI Standard Source code should be open source or 
>>>>> closed source. As
>>>>> you know (since most of you have access to it, we decided to keep 
>>>>> the standard
>>>>> closed for a few reasons (avoiding rogue copies of the Standard was 
>>>>> a big one),
>>>>> but recently, the scales have tipped back toward open sourcing and 
>>>>> after
>>>>> talking to Bill and Martin some more, we think it’s finally time to 
>>>>> open up the
>>>>> MPI Standard repository. Specifically, these are the issues that 
>>>>> get addressed
>>>>> by moving to a public repository:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Participation to the forum has a barrier to entry (i.e. me)
>>>>> * Our current automated testing system is broken and will not be fixed
>>>>> * We rely on special dispensation from GitHub for free, private 
>>>>> repositories
>>>>>
>>>>> I’ll be discussing this in more detail in Portland, but I want to 
>>>>> make folks
>>>>> aware that this is coming now because it will have some impact on 
>>>>> people who
>>>>> are actively working on text proposals. The mitigations here should 
>>>>> be pretty
>>>>> straightforward and I have both slides (for a high level) and a 
>>>>> wiki page (for
>>>>> details) on what’s happening and what you need to do about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The short version for the purpose of this email and your action 
>>>>> item leading up
>>>>> the forum next week is to do two thing s:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Back up your branches.
>>>>> 2. Make a note for each of your open pull requests on where the are 
>>>>> and what
>>>>> issues they’re attached to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Detailed notes and the slides I’ll present in Portland on how to do 
>>>>> this are
>>>>> here: [
>>>>> https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/wiki/Migrate-to-Public-Repository 
>>>>> |
>>>>> https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/wiki/Migrate-to-Public-Repository 
>>>>> ]
>>>>>
>>>>> The plan is for me to flip this switch DURING THE FEBRUARY MEETING! 
>>>>> This should
>>>>> not disrupt any readings for the meeting itself as none of the pull 
>>>>> requests
>>>>> will actually be deleted, but they will all become stale and we’ll 
>>>>> need to
>>>>> re-open new ones. The main benefit of doing this during the meeting 
>>>>> is that
>>>>> if/when anyone has trouble, I’ll be there in person to provide live 
>>>>> help to
>>>>> anyone else that’s there (sorry, Marc-Andre, you’ll need to follow 
>>>>> my slides
>>>>> remotely \uD83D\uDE00).
>>>>>
>>>>> Please email me if you have questions or concerns. If there’s 
>>>>> enough demand, I’d
>>>>> even be willing to do a short Virtual Meeting on this on Wednesday.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Wesley
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> mpi-forum mailing list
>>>>> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org <mailto:mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
>>>>> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email 
>>>> rabenseifner at hlrs.de <mailto:rabenseifner at hlrs.de> .
>>>> High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 .
>>>> University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 .
>>>> Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . 
>>>> www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner 
>>>> <http://www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner> .
>>>> Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . . . . (Office: Room 1.307) .
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mpi-forum mailing list
>>> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org <mailto:mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
>>> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpi-forum mailing list
> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum
> 