With this feedback of my distinguish colleagues, I don't see any point of perusing this proposal and I will be withdrawing this ticket in the next mpi forum meeting. Thanks, .Erez From: mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:mpi-22-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of William Gropp Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 11:37 AM To: MPI 2.2 Cc: Main MPI Forum mailing list Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] [Mpi-forum] The const proposal - Ticket 140 This is an example of why we have two votes - to give everyone a chance to take a second look at the issues. I'll note that the 17-10 (counting no's and abstains together) is worrisome; while a majority vote is the rule, a good standard will make a compelling argument for each feature. The process here would normally be to have a debate and then the second vote. However, for MPI 2.2, we have the additional requirements of limited scope of change to implementations - we didn't define what that meant precisely (and that is a good thing), but there is a strong argument that limited scope of change would require at least a majority of implementations to agree that the change is minor. Bill On May 27, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Erez Haba wrote: Hi all, I'm not really sure how to respond to this email. I will just note that this proposal has passed 1st vote last September with the following results. 4. Vote topic: MPI-2.2 const for C bindings, 1st vote: YES: 17 NO: 4 ABSTAIN: 6 MISSED: 0 Result: Ballot passed http://meetings.mpi-forum.org/secretary/2008/09/votes.php ince then we decided to postpone the 1st vote to add very few minor correction to ticket #46 (the original proposal) and thus created ticket #140. I believe that all the points you mention below have been discussed in the forum meeting(s). Thanks, .Erez From: mpi-forum-bounces_at_[hidden]<mailto:mpi-forum-bounces_at_[hidden]> [mailto:mpi-forum-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Richard Treumann Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:53 AM To: Main MPI Forum mailing list Cc: mpi-22_at_[hidden]<mailto:mpi-22_at_[hidden]> Subject: [Mpi-forum] The const proposal - Ticket 140 All - The signatories of this letter represent the majority of MPI implementors participating in the MPI Forum. We are concerned that proposal #140 ("Add const Keyword to the C bindings") has a number of issues which suggest delaying to MPI-3 would be appropriate. In particular, the proposal: - Is likely to pass a simple majority vote, but does not carry the support of the majority of MPI implementors, suggesting consensus has not been reached. - Changes 90+ MPI API interfaces, which is not a "trivial" change and therefore does not meet the intent of the MPI-2.2 process. - Is not needed to fix any serious bug in the standard text or to solve an issue that cannot easily be avoided by the MPI application. - Does not offer any demonstrable optimization opportunities for implementation or application, but may constrain future implementation opportunities. Therefore, we ask for your assistance in deferring proposal #140 to the MPI-3 process, where more time can be spent assessing its impact. Thank you, - Cisco: Jeff Squires - Intel: Alexander Supalov & Keith Underwood - Sandia: Brian Barrett - IBM: Richard Treumann - QLogic: Avneesh Pant - UTenn: George Bosilca - HP: David George Solt - UHouston: Edgar Gabriel - Myricom: Patrick Geoffray - ORNL: Richard Graham - Sun: Terry Dontje - NEC: Hubert Ritzdorf & Jesper Traeff Dick Treumann - MPI Team IBM Systems & Technology Group Dept X2ZA / MS P963 -- 2455 South Road -- Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Tele (845) 433-7846 Fax (845) 433-8363 <ATT00001.txt> 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 *