On Sep 6, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> v1.3rc1 has been released two weeks ago and many things are going on
> right now, in all branches:
> * I just finished fixing my pile of distance-related bugs (thanks to
> multinode support and OMPI users). I backported the really important
> ones in v1.3 and v1.2. Do we want a 1.2.2?
> * I applied some non-trivial changes (mostly XML) to v1.3 after rc1,
> which means rc2 won't be the final release.
> * I wonder if we should also include in v1.3 the XML/JSON/whatever
> export/import that's under discussion in another thread. If we need it
> for OMPI, it may need a backport in v1.2 anyway, so getting early
> feedback through v1.3 would be better.
I'm a bit ambivalent about this:
- I don't know where we ended up in the other thread: do we want JSON or no? If we can parse it easily without an external dependency, then I think it's worthwhile.
- OMPI currently uses hwloc 1.2. From that perspective, I'd like to see JSON in hwloc 1.2.x.
- OTOH, JSON would be a new feature, and probably shouldn't be introduced after a x.y.0 release.
- I could bump OMPI to v1.3, but it's not as mature as 1.2.x, which just makes me a little nervous (the goal for the hwloc stuff is to bring it in late in the OMPI v1.5 series... but I've already got some feedback that there might be resistance to what we're proposing to use hwloc for in OMPI, so we'll see :-) ).
> * If we apply these big export/import changes in v1.3, we're not going
> to do the final v1.3 release very soon. Should we do a rc2 now (the
> changelog is already large) and then a rc3 with this new export/import?
> Or wait for the new import/export before doing rc2?
If we're going to do JSON, might as well have fewer RCs. "RC", to me, has always meant "feature complete."
> I'm a bit too lazy to release a 1.2.2 except if there's a single RC :)
> And I think I would vote for 1.3rc2 now too.
I can drive the v1.2.x release stuff.
For corporate legal information go to: