Thanks, Jeff and Torsten. I was about to ask for new states on the tickets for just this purpose. I've also updated the README-2.2 to provide documentation on the markup to be used for 2.2 updates; I'm currently testing and refining the definition of those macros. I'm trying those out on my chapters, plus ticket 16 from the datatypes chapter. Bill On Jun 11, 2009, at 7:37 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:

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-2.2 ticket states-suggested.pdf><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