Why go to all this effort, and not just fork 1.7 from the trunk, skipping the whole merge process ? Seems like it would be much more prudent to spend time on improving the code base, adding missing MPI support, etc., rather than spending the time on a merge.
Rich On 10/8/10 6:34 PM, "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: On Oct 8, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > I have no problem with that, but remember that it will create an ABI break > for any third-party plugin developer. > > As long as we are comfortable doing that, or create the > backward-compatibility we discussed, then this plan is fine by me. Yes, we will definitely have to make sure we don't break backwards compatibility: - MPI API - the symbol / filename changes we did for MCA I don't think anything else matters, right? -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@open-mpi.org http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
