> On 16Nov 2022, at 5:11 PM, Wes Bland <wes...@wesbland.com> wrote: > > The rules say you need to get four IMOVE (voting) orgs to support creating a > WG at a meeting: > > > Working groups can be established at MPI Forum meetings once at least four > > IMOVE organizations indicate support for that proposed Working Group. > > So feel free to propose it at the December meeting and have some folks lined > up to give it a thumbs up. Of course, in the meantime, folks are free to > start getting together and discussing the topic. The old mailing list from > 2008 is still around <https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi3-abi>, > but I’d recommend you not use it since it uses our old naming scheme. Once > the group is official, I’ll make the new list and GitHub org.
Thanks, I’ll rally the votes. Interested parties should ping me on Slack to be added to #wg-abi. Somebody was optimistic enough to create https://github.com/mpiwg-abi/ this morning but it’s a mystery who 😉 Jeff > Thanks, > Wes > >> On Nov 16, 2022, at 1:54 AM, Jeff Hammond via mpi-forum >> <mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org> wrote: >> >> I don't know what we do to create new working groups with the post-COVID >> rules, but I would like to create and chair a WG focused on ABI >> standardization. >> >> There is strong support for this effort in many user communities, including >> developers and maintainers of Spack, mpi4py, Julia MPI (MPI.jl), Rust MPI >> (rsmpi), PETSc and NVHPC SDK, to name a few. There are even a few >> implementers who have expressed support, but I won't name them for their own >> protection. >> >> The problem is so exasperating for our users that there are at least two >> different projects devoted to mitigating ABI problems (not including shims >> built in to the aforementioned MPI wrappers): >> >> https://github.com/cea-hpc/wi4mpi <https://github.com/cea-hpc/wi4mpi> >> https://github.com/eschnett/MPItrampoline >> <https://github.com/eschnett/MPItrampoline> >> >> I've written about this a bit already, for those who are interested. More >> material will be forthcoming once I have time for more experiments. >> >> https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI.md >> <https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI.md> >> https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI_Part_2.md >> <https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI_Part_2.md> >> https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI_Part_3.md >> <https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI_Part_3.md> >> https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI_Part_4.md >> <https://github.com/jeffhammond/blog/blob/main/MPI_Needs_ABI_Part_4.md> >> >> I understand this is a controversial topic, particularly for implementers. >> I hope that we can proceed objectively. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jeff >> >> -- >> Jeff Hammond >> jeff.scie...@gmail.com <mailto:jeff.scie...@gmail.com> >> http://jeffhammond.github.io/ >> <http://jeffhammond.github.io/>_______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org >> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum >
_______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum
