Blast! My e-mail client appears to have trimmed the URL that Bill
originally sent; the one included below doesn't work. The real URL is:
Sorry about that.
On Feb 10, 2007, at 7:54 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> FYI. The MPI Forum is re-convening to make some corrections to the
> MPI-2 standard. Note that this is *not* a call for new features to
> MPI; it's a call for help in fixing the bugs in the current MPI-2
> spec. Bill Gropp's e-mail below briefly describes the current state
> of affairs and gives a URL containing more information (including how
> to join the mpi-21 mailing list).
> NOTE: Pardon the posting to multiple lists simultaneously -- the
> intent is to spread this message far and wide to find people who are
> interested in helping with defining MPI (be warned: Rusty Lusk
> correctly characterized this as "grubby, grubby work"). These four
> lists share a common listserver; it should be smart enough to only
> send this message once to people who are subscribed to more than one
> of the lists in the "To:" line.
> Begin forwarded message:
>> From: William Gropp <gropp_at_[hidden]>
>> Date: February 9, 2007 10:35:18 AM EST
>> To: mpi-21_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: MPI 2.1
>> Reply-To: mpi-21_at_[hidden]
>> Welcome to the MPI 2.1 discussions
>> The MPI 2.1 web page is available at http://www.mpi-forum.org/
>> mpi2_1/. This page contains a link to the current errata
>> discussion (please use this link through the forum page, as we may
>> move this page in the future). You will find on this page many
>> issues that have been raised and are still open, as well as a draft
>> ballot for the third round of errata items. All items are open for
>> discussion and new items may be submitted to mpi-21_at_[hidden]
>> or to mpi-comments_at_mpi-forum.org.
>> The first order of business is to determine the rules for voting.
>> The rules that the MPI Forum has been using are posted on the MPI
>> 2.1 web page (http://www.mpi-forum.org/mpi2_1/); the history of
>> errata votes (linked off of that page) shows which institutions
>> have participated in the last two ballots. I suggest that we
>> discuss updates to these rules to address the fact that we probably
>> won't have face-to-face meetings, at least in the beginning. Then
>> the current voting members (based on the last two votes) can vote
>> on that rule change.
>> Discussions of the technical issues can start at any time (in fact,
>> the page of issues has been available since before the original
>> errata discussions). Send mail about these issues to mpi-21_at_mpi-
> Jeff Squyres
> Server Virtualization Business Unit
> Cisco Systems
> users mailing list
Server Virtualization Business Unit