On 16/06/09 at 09:24 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > On 16 June 2009 at 10:06, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > | On 15/06/09 at 18:32 -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > | > Hello Pavan, > | > > | > Thank you for the inquiry. I've somewhat left MPICH for now (focusing > | > on OpenMPI, which I don't maintain but use), and assigned its > | > maintenance to the Debian Scientific Computing team. But I think there > | > are others very interested in MPICH2, and am copying the debian-science > | > list to gauge interest. > | > | (Adding Camm Maguire, the LAM maintainer as Cc) > > That address has been out of commission for a while; Camm used to work there > but AFAIK no longer does. I don't have the replacement address handy though. > > | This raises an interesting question: if we package mpich2, couldn't we > | drop mpich(1) and LAM from Debian? Are there cases where it's more > | interesting to use mpich v1 or LAM than mpich2 or OpenMPI? > > As a former Open MPI co-maintainer: yes, LAM is to be deprecated one day as > Open MPI is actively developed whereas LAM is dead. On the other hand, Open > MPI is available on only a subset of architectures. It's tricky. > > That said, getting good MPICH2 in would be super too!
Would you want to co-maintain it? -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [email protected] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [email protected] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
