Skip to content

Unify the PMIx2x components and minor cleanup of coll/sync #1994

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 22, 2016
Merged

Unify the PMIx2x components and minor cleanup of coll/sync #1994

merged 2 commits into from
Aug 22, 2016

Conversation

rhc54
Copy link
Contributor

@rhc54 rhc54 commented Aug 22, 2016

No description provided.

Ralph Castain added 2 commits August 22, 2016 12:54
…internal PMIx 2.x library component. This ensures that we always stay in sync with the two as that is becoming a problem.
@rhc54 rhc54 merged commit aa21013 into open-mpi:master Aug 22, 2016
@rhc54 rhc54 deleted the topic/unify branch August 22, 2016 22:20
@artpol84
Copy link
Contributor

artpol84 commented Aug 24, 2016

@rhc54 @jladd-mlnx @jsquyres @hppritcha

I think that this PR was merged too quickly: submitted Aug 23 3:33 AM my time and merged 5:20 AM my time same day. There was no @-mention so I had no chance to notice this.

It might be a straightforward change but periodically I'm completely loosing the track of what's going on and things that was working previously mysteriously stop working. This is OK for the development branch but I need to be aware. We are working with PMIx as well and sometimes I have to spend half of the day rearranging things to just compile OMPI.

Another example is b0cc9b0. Why do we have ext20 aligned with master and not pmix/release/v2.x ?? This means that currently one has no way to use/test pmix-v2.0 with any ompi: ompi-release supports only pmix-v1 and ompi/master now supports only pmix/master.

@rhc54 can you please @-mention me in all commits that affect the pmix side of OMPI and not merge important commits until you hear from me?

@artpol84
Copy link
Contributor

Also I think that we should separate indentation changes from the functionality changes so it will be easier to review them. For example in b0cc9b0 indentation-related changes take reasonable part of the commit complicating the review.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants