On Nov 4, 2010, at 1:42 PM, DongInn Kim wrote: > Yes, if we can manage the MPI part with more generic term, that would be > really great so that we can use the same main framework without diverging to > another perl module to deal with FTT or something like this.
It would be much mo' preferable to not fork the code to have multiple cores -- one for MPI:: and one for Middleware::. Off the top of my head, here's the areas I think would need to be updated: - the MPI:: tree; rename to Middleware:: ? - update all references in the code s/MPI::/Middleware/g - add support for "Middleware Install" and "Middleware Get" section names; "MPI Get" and "MPI Install" phases should become aliases for these - update the wiki documentation pages accordingly If you've got the cycles to do this, I'd love to see a patch. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
