Hi Hubert,

Thanks for the feedback. The language we used in the proposal is consistent with the existing spec. I think I would prefer to let the Hybrid WG make this change when the Forum decides to move ahead with their renaming proposal.

~Jim.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 6:05 AM, Hubert Ritzdorf <Hubert.Ritzdorf@emea.nec.com> wrote:

Hi,

in conjunction with the process discussion in the hybrid group:

Wouldn't it make sense to replace "process" by "MPI process" in the new text on Pages 249-250 ?

Hubert

From: mpiwg-p2p [mpiwg-p2p-bounces@lists.mpi-forum.org] on behalf of Jim Dinan [james.dinan@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 9:40 PM
To: MPI WG Point To Point Communications working group
Subject: [mpiwg-p2p] Info assertions draft

Hi All,

I have attached an updated draft for the info assertions proposal. The two week deadline is quickly approaching; please send feedback before the end of the week.

Thanks,

~Jim.

Click here to report this email as spam.

_______________________________________________
mpiwg-p2p mailing list
mpiwg-p2p@lists.mpi-forum.org
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-p2p