Open MPI logo

Docs Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Docs mailing list

From: Josh Hursey (jjhursey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-14 14:35:18


There is already a svn repository called 'ompi-design' that contains
some starter docs that haven't been touched [LAM/MPI user guide latex
infrastructure]. This repository was created a little over a year
ago, but I think I'm the only one that has used it (for some brief
checkpoint/restart documentation).

We could clean that repository out, and change permissions on it if
folks wanted.

Just a thought,

On Sep 14, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:

> I'm moving a thread that Richard and I were having to the list so
> that it can get archived / be public / etc.
> On Sep 14, 2007, at 2:17 PM, Richard Friedman wrote:
>>> Do we want a separate SVN for the OMPI docs themselves, or should
>>> this stuff be a subdirectory off the main OMPI SVN repository?
>> Well, if we want to open this up to project members, we should
>> follow whatever procedures you already have created for projects. I
>> haven't gotten that far into the OpenMPI community to determine
>> what's the best approach, but if you have already a way of
>> differentiating projects, then we should look at this as just
>> another project.
> This probably makes sense. I think there's one minor drawback to
> having a separate SVN repo for docs and several benefits:
> 1. Drawback: If we make it a separate project (i.e., different SVN
> repository), we have to do a little integration work when we make
> Open MPI tarballs. But this is probably not a huge deal since the
> process to make an Open MPI tarball is already fully automated.
> 2. Benefit: Making a separate SVN repository would make a clean
> separation between code developer committers and documentation
> committers.
> 3. Benefit: With a separate SVN repository, the docs group can have
> their own Trac (bug tracking system) and wiki, vs. sharing the Trac/
> wiki of the main OMPI developer group.
> The icky thing is that the OMPI group already has a heavily-populated-
> but-not-public SVN repository named "ompi-docs". It's full of
> academic papers written by the OMPI members (submitted to conferences
> and journals and the like), etc. So we can't really use that name
> for a SVN repository. ompi-documentation, perhaps?
> Thoughts?
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> Cisco Systems
> _______________________________________________
> docs mailing list
> docs_at_[hidden]