- Mpi-22 - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

Ok. Let's get a few more approvals of this, and if everyone likes it, I'll add the extra states to Trac. On Jun 12, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > Jeff, > For me, it is now perfect. > I hope that all chapter authors are lucky with it. > Rolf > > On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:47:48 -0700 > Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: > > Ok, try this diagram. > > > > On Jun 12, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > >> Aswers below > >> > >> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:09:51 -0700 > >> Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: > >> > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > >> > > >> >> In your state diagram, you may differentiate between ticket > >>author > >> >> and chapter author. Please can you use a new color for the > >> chapter- > >> >> author trasitions. > >> >> > >> > > >> > Can do. > >> > > >> >> If a reviewer detects a bug, he should set the state back to > >> >> "Passed". A new color for the reviewer is also needed for this > >> >> transition. > >> >> > >> > > >> > I think that this is what I was thinking when I had an extra > state > >> >in my first diagram -- that the states would go between "text > >> >committed" and "waiting for PDF reviews" until it was finally > >> >"ticket complete". > >> > > >> > So do you want to make the reviewers responsible for changing the > >> > state back away from "waiting for PDF reviews" to the previous > >> >state? That would be different than what we did for proposals, > >> >where the proposal author or chair would move the ticket between > >> >"forum feedback requested", "not ready", and "waiting for > >>(proposal) > >> >reviews". > >> > >> Yes, because we have three parties: The ticket author who has > only a > >> controling role, the reviewers, and the chapter author. > >> It must be absolutely sure, that the chapter author savely detects > >> when he has to repair something. Therefore I would like that > >> the status goes back to "Passed". This should be done by the > >>reviewer > >> as soon as he detects a problem. This reduces the risk, that > >>something > >> is overseen. > >> > >> The ticket author is doing only the final transition to "Ticket > >> complete" > >> after he and his 4 reviewers have checked the ticket-text in > >> the MPI-2.2 standard. > >> The ticket author may also be active, if the chapter author > >> has not seen that a problem was detected and he has to repair > >> something. > >> > >> Please, can you mention at the forward transition > >> from "Passed" to "Waiting for PDF reviews": > >> > >> Set by a chapter author when all involved chapter authors > >> have finished the MPI-2.2 latex text and produced a sniplet > >> of pdf pages of this ticket. > >> > >> Please, can you mention at the backward transition > >> from "Waiting for PDF reviews" to "Passed": > >> > >> Set back by a reviewer if he detects a bug in the pdf file. > >> > >> We must be sure, that all 85 tickets are handled correctly > >> by the 13 chapter authors. > >> > >> Rolf > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Jeff Squyres > >> > Cisco Systems > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > mpi-22 mailing list > >> > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > >> > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > >> > >> Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email > >>rabenseifner_at_[hidden] > >> 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 > >> Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpi-22 mailing list > >> mpi-22_at_[hidden] > >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > >> > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Squyres > > Cisco Systems > > Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner_at_[hidden] > 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 > Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

Jeff, For me, it is now perfect. I hope that all chapter authors are lucky with it. Rolf On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:47:48 -0700 Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: > Ok, try this diagram. > > On Jun 12, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > >> Aswers below >> >> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:09:51 -0700 >> Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: >> > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: >> > >> >> In your state diagram, you may differentiate between ticket >>author >> >> and chapter author. Please can you use a new color for the >> chapter- >> >> author trasitions. >> >> >> > >> > Can do. >> > >> >> If a reviewer detects a bug, he should set the state back to >> >> "Passed". A new color for the reviewer is also needed for this >> >> transition. >> >> >> > >> > I think that this is what I was thinking when I had an extra state >> >in my first diagram -- that the states would go between "text >> >committed" and "waiting for PDF reviews" until it was finally >> >"ticket complete". >> > >> > So do you want to make the reviewers responsible for changing the >> > state back away from "waiting for PDF reviews" to the previous >> >state? That would be different than what we did for proposals, >> >where the proposal author or chair would move the ticket between >> >"forum feedback requested", "not ready", and "waiting for >>(proposal) >> >reviews". >> >> Yes, because we have three parties: The ticket author who has only a >> controling role, the reviewers, and the chapter author. >> It must be absolutely sure, that the chapter author savely detects >> when he has to repair something. Therefore I would like that >> the status goes back to "Passed". This should be done by the >>reviewer >> as soon as he detects a problem. This reduces the risk, that >>something >> is overseen. >> >> The ticket author is doing only the final transition to "Ticket >> complete" >> after he and his 4 reviewers have checked the ticket-text in >> the MPI-2.2 standard. >> The ticket author may also be active, if the chapter author >> has not seen that a problem was detected and he has to repair >> something. >> >> Please, can you mention at the forward transition >> from "Passed" to "Waiting for PDF reviews": >> >> Set by a chapter author when all involved chapter authors >> have finished the MPI-2.2 latex text and produced a sniplet >> of pdf pages of this ticket. >> >> Please, can you mention at the backward transition >> from "Waiting for PDF reviews" to "Passed": >> >> Set back by a reviewer if he detects a bug in the pdf file. >> >> We must be sure, that all 85 tickets are handled correctly >> by the 13 chapter authors. >> >> Rolf >> > >> > -- >> > Jeff Squyres >> > Cisco Systems >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > mpi-22 mailing list >> > mpi-22_at_[hidden] >> > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 >> >> Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email >>rabenseifner_at_[hidden] >> 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 >> Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-22 mailing list >> mpi-22_at_[hidden] >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 >> > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner_at_[hidden] 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 Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

Ok, try this diagram. On Jun 12, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > Aswers below > > On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:09:51 -0700 > Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > >> In your state diagram, you may differentiate between ticket author > >> and chapter author. Please can you use a new color for the > chapter- > >> author trasitions. > >> > > > > Can do. > > > >> If a reviewer detects a bug, he should set the state back to > >> "Passed". A new color for the reviewer is also needed for this > >> transition. > >> > > > > I think that this is what I was thinking when I had an extra state > >in my first diagram -- that the states would go between "text > >committed" and "waiting for PDF reviews" until it was finally > >"ticket complete". > > > > So do you want to make the reviewers responsible for changing the > > state back away from "waiting for PDF reviews" to the previous > >state? That would be different than what we did for proposals, > >where the proposal author or chair would move the ticket between > >"forum feedback requested", "not ready", and "waiting for (proposal) > >reviews". > > Yes, because we have three parties: The ticket author who has only a > controling role, the reviewers, and the chapter author. > It must be absolutely sure, that the chapter author savely detects > when he has to repair something. Therefore I would like that > the status goes back to "Passed". This should be done by the reviewer > as soon as he detects a problem. This reduces the risk, that something > is overseen. > > The ticket author is doing only the final transition to "Ticket > complete" > after he and his 4 reviewers have checked the ticket-text in > the MPI-2.2 standard. > The ticket author may also be active, if the chapter author > has not seen that a problem was detected and he has to repair > something. > > Please, can you mention at the forward transition > from "Passed" to "Waiting for PDF reviews": > > Set by a chapter author when all involved chapter authors > have finished the MPI-2.2 latex text and produced a sniplet > of pdf pages of this ticket. > > Please, can you mention at the backward transition > from "Waiting for PDF reviews" to "Passed": > > Set back by a reviewer if he detects a bug in the pdf file. > > We must be sure, that all 85 tickets are handled correctly > by the 13 chapter authors. > > Rolf > > > > -- > > Jeff Squyres > > Cisco Systems > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-22 mailing list > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > > Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner_at_[hidden] > 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 > Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems *

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

Aswers below On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:09:51 -0700 Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > >> In your state diagram, you may differentiate between ticket author >> and chapter author. Please can you use a new color for the chapter- >> author trasitions. >> > > Can do. > >> If a reviewer detects a bug, he should set the state back to >> "Passed". A new color for the reviewer is also needed for this >> transition. >> > > I think that this is what I was thinking when I had an extra state >in my first diagram -- that the states would go between "text >committed" and "waiting for PDF reviews" until it was finally >"ticket complete". > > So do you want to make the reviewers responsible for changing the > state back away from "waiting for PDF reviews" to the previous >state? That would be different than what we did for proposals, >where the proposal author or chair would move the ticket between >"forum feedback requested", "not ready", and "waiting for (proposal) >reviews". Yes, because we have three parties: The ticket author who has only a controling role, the reviewers, and the chapter author. It must be absolutely sure, that the chapter author savely detects when he has to repair something. Therefore I would like that the status goes back to "Passed". This should be done by the reviewer as soon as he detects a problem. This reduces the risk, that something is overseen. The ticket author is doing only the final transition to "Ticket complete" after he and his 4 reviewers have checked the ticket-text in the MPI-2.2 standard. The ticket author may also be active, if the chapter author has not seen that a problem was detected and he has to repair something. Please, can you mention at the forward transition from "Passed" to "Waiting for PDF reviews": Set by a chapter author when all involved chapter authors have finished the MPI-2.2 latex text and produced a sniplet of pdf pages of this ticket. Please, can you mention at the backward transition from "Waiting for PDF reviews" to "Passed": Set back by a reviewer if he detects a bug in the pdf file. We must be sure, that all 85 tickets are handled correctly by the 13 chapter authors. Rolf > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner_at_[hidden] 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 Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

On Jun 12, 2009, at 1:49 AM, William Gropp wrote: > Some tickets involve multiple chapters, not counting the change log > (though most of the currently passed items will not have change log > entries as they are clarifications to the text that do not impact > implementations). It would be useful to have a field with a list of > the authors, though I'd also need a mapping of email/Name to trac ID > for this in order to fill this in (my list is by name). > It looks like Trac will let me add this in one of two ways: 1. A text box where you can type in author names. 2. A series of checkboxes, one for each chapter author (e.g., "Jeff Squyres __, Bill Gropp ___, ...etc."). The advantage of #1 is simplicity. The advantage of #2 is commonality / ease of searching. Which would you prefer? > For the items that have multiple authors, the easiest way for the > authors is provide PDFs for their sections (I've already done that for > the tickets that overlap my chapters). Is there some easy way to > associate these files with the authors when there are multiple chapter > authors involved? > Probably not -- I think attachments are attachments. Perhaps we should just have a filename convention? chap-<foo>.pdf, like they are produced when you "make" in the chapter subdirectory? I'd also suggest that authors should snip and only include the relevant pages when possible (rather than the entire chapter) -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > In your state diagram, you may differentiate between ticket author > and chapter author. Please can you use a new color for the chapter- > author trasitions. > Can do. > If a reviewer detects a bug, he should set the state back to > "Passed". A new color for the reviewer is also needed for this > transition. > I think that this is what I was thinking when I had an extra state in my first diagram -- that the states would go between "text committed" and "waiting for PDF reviews" until it was finally "ticket complete". So do you want to make the reviewers responsible for changing the state back away from "waiting for PDF reviews" to the previous state? That would be different than what we did for proposals, where the proposal author or chair would move the ticket between "forum feedback requested", "not ready", and "waiting for (proposal) reviews". -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 12 Jun '09

12 Jun '09

Some tickets involve multiple chapters, not counting the change log (though most of the currently passed items will not have change log entries as they are clarifications to the text that do not impact implementations). It would be useful to have a field with a list of the authors, though I'd also need a mapping of email/Name to trac ID for this in order to fill this in (my list is by name). For the items that have multiple authors, the easiest way for the authors is provide PDFs for their sections (I've already done that for the tickets that overlap my chapters). Is there some easy way to associate these files with the authors when there are multiple chapter authors involved? Bill On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > Do you want to add a field to the tickets with chapter author trac ID? > > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 9:24 AM, William Gropp wrote: > >> I've put together a spreadsheet, so I know who they are - and I will >> let them know. >> >> Bill >> >> On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Rajeev Thakur wrote: >> >>> One question is how do chapter authors know which of the 80+ tickets >>> for >>> 2.2 apply to their chapter? And some apply to multiple chapters. >>> >>> Rajeev >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] >>>> [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff >> Squyres >>>> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 7:37 AM >>>> To: MPI 2.2 >>>> Subject: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex >>>> >>>> Torsten raised an excellent point in Menlo Park: we need to >>>> amend our >>>> 2.2 ticket process to include appropriate checks after a >>>> proposal has >>>> passed to ensure that the resulting text is committed properly and >>>> without errors. >>>> >>>> As discussed in Menlo Park, the suggestion is that chapter authors >>>> commit the text to SVN and then attach a PDF to the ticket to get >>>> reviewed by the existing ticket reviewers (potentially just a >>>> few PDF >>>> pages showing the changes). Reviewers check that the >>>> resulting PDF is >>>> exactly what was passed in the body of the proposal. Once the PDF >>>> passes review, the ticket can be closed. >>>> >>>> --> Rolf/Bill: chapter authors will need guidance on the >> appropriate >>>> Latex markup for signifying changes for MPI-2.2 (e.g., the text- >>>> coloring magic). >>>> >>>> A picture is worth 1,000 words: I have attached a suggested >>>> diagram of >>>> Trac ticket state transitions -- the new states are yellow and >>>> underlined (some old states changed names slightly; those >>>> changed are >>>> yellow/underlined as well). >>>> >>>> Comments? (particularly from Bill and chapter authors) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jeff Squyres >>>> Cisco Systems >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpi-22 mailing list >>> mpi-22_at_[hidden] >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 >> >> William Gropp >> Deputy Director for Research >> Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies >> Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science >> University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-22 mailing list >> mpi-22_at_[hidden] >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 >> > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 William Gropp Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 11 Jun '09

11 Jun '09

Jeff, As far as I understand, tickets are implemented by the chapter-authors and not by the ticket-authors? In your state diagram, you may differentiate between ticket author and chapter author. Please can you use a new color for the chapter-author trasitions. If a reviewer detects a bug, he should set the state back to "Passed". A new color for the reviewer is also needed for this transition. Most tickets have at least two chapter authors: - the main chapter author - and me, the author of the Change-Log. I plan to do all Change-Log entries of all passed tickets - in a few days - and after next meeting. Then the chapter authors can use in their sniplets also the appropriate change-log page. Best regards Rolf On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:46:47 -0700 Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote: > On Jun 11, 2009, at 8:16 AM, William Gropp wrote: > >> Do we need separate "text committed" and "awaiting PDF reviews"? >> Why >> not just a "committed and PDF awaiting review"? >> > > Having two states made sense to me when I drew the picture. But now >I can't remember why. :-) > > I wanted a state to wait in while the reviewers are checking the > [latest] PDF. I think you're right that we only need 1 state for > that. See attached. > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner_at_[hidden] 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 Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 11 Jun '09

11 Jun '09

That would be good as chapter authors can search for which tickets they need to incorporate. > -----Original Message----- > From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 11:58 AM > To: MPI 2.2 > Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex > > Do you want to add a field to the tickets with chapter author trac ID? > > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 9:24 AM, William Gropp wrote: > > > I've put together a spreadsheet, so I know who they are - and I will > > let them know. > > > > Bill > > > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Rajeev Thakur wrote: > > > > > One question is how do chapter authors know which of the > 80+ tickets > > > for > > > 2.2 apply to their chapter? And some apply to multiple chapters. > > > > > > Rajeev > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > > >> [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff > > Squyres > > >> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 7:37 AM > > >> To: MPI 2.2 > > >> Subject: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex > > >> > > >> Torsten raised an excellent point in Menlo Park: we need to > > >> amend our > > >> 2.2 ticket process to include appropriate checks after a > > >> proposal has > > >> passed to ensure that the resulting text is committed > properly and > > >> without errors. > > >> > > >> As discussed in Menlo Park, the suggestion is that > chapter authors > > >> commit the text to SVN and then attach a PDF to the ticket to get > > >> reviewed by the existing ticket reviewers (potentially just a > > >> few PDF > > >> pages showing the changes). Reviewers check that the > > >> resulting PDF is > > >> exactly what was passed in the body of the proposal. > Once the PDF > > >> passes review, the ticket can be closed. > > >> > > >> --> Rolf/Bill: chapter authors will need guidance on the > > appropriate > > >> Latex markup for signifying changes for MPI-2.2 (e.g., the text- > > >> coloring magic). > > >> > > >> A picture is worth 1,000 words: I have attached a suggested > > >> diagram of > > >> Trac ticket state transitions -- the new states are yellow and > > >> underlined (some old states changed names slightly; those > > >> changed are > > >> yellow/underlined as well). > > >> > > >> Comments? (particularly from Bill and chapter authors) > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Jeff Squyres > > >> Cisco Systems > > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > mpi-22 mailing list > > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > > > > William Gropp > > Deputy Director for Research > > Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies > > Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science > > University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-22 mailing list > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > > > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 >

1 0

Re: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex
by unknown＠example.com 11 Jun '09

11 Jun '09

Do you want to add a field to the tickets with chapter author trac ID? On Jun 11, 2009, at 9:24 AM, William Gropp wrote: > I've put together a spreadsheet, so I know who they are - and I will > let them know. > > Bill > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Rajeev Thakur wrote: > > > One question is how do chapter authors know which of the 80+ tickets > > for > > 2.2 apply to their chapter? And some apply to multiple chapters. > > > > Rajeev > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] > >> [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff > Squyres > >> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 7:37 AM > >> To: MPI 2.2 > >> Subject: [Mpi-22] SVN committing MPI-2.2 latex > >> > >> Torsten raised an excellent point in Menlo Park: we need to > >> amend our > >> 2.2 ticket process to include appropriate checks after a > >> proposal has > >> passed to ensure that the resulting text is committed properly and > >> without errors. > >> > >> As discussed in Menlo Park, the suggestion is that chapter authors > >> commit the text to SVN and then attach a PDF to the ticket to get > >> reviewed by the existing ticket reviewers (potentially just a > >> few PDF > >> pages showing the changes). Reviewers check that the > >> resulting PDF is > >> exactly what was passed in the body of the proposal. Once the PDF > >> passes review, the ticket can be closed. > >> > >> --> Rolf/Bill: chapter authors will need guidance on the > appropriate > >> Latex markup for signifying changes for MPI-2.2 (e.g., the text- > >> coloring magic). > >> > >> A picture is worth 1,000 words: I have attached a suggested > >> diagram of > >> Trac ticket state transitions -- the new states are yellow and > >> underlined (some old states changed names slightly; those > >> changed are > >> yellow/underlined as well). > >> > >> Comments? (particularly from Bill and chapter authors) > >> > >> -- > >> Jeff Squyres > >> Cisco Systems > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-22 mailing list > > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > > William Gropp > Deputy Director for Research > Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies > Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science > University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-22 mailing list > mpi-22_at_[hidden] > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22 > -- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems

1 0