Hi,
Regarding devlop vs master, Marshall Clow (the Release Manager) has
asked what we want to do with the changes waiting in develop w.r.t. the
upcoming 1.65, those current status is:
"Release open for bug fixes and documentation updates. Other changes by
permission of a release manager."
I merged it to master, let me know of any issue.
Thanks
Alain
On 15/07/2017 15:28, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
It passes with:
- Intel compiler 17.0.2
- library IMPI 5.0.3.048
On 15/07/2017 14:08, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
https://github.com/boostorg/mpi
It passes with:
- Intel compiler 17.0.2
- library IMPI 5.0.3.048
On 15/07/2017 14:08, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
https://github.com/boostorg/mpi/pull/49
On 15/07/2017 14:05, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
Hi,
I just realized that people with a platform boost
I answered on the patch issue in another post.
Regarding the todo list:
On 15/07/2017 00:01, MM wrote:
[..]
Dream wishes for boost mpi are extension to support MPI3-1, for
c++11/14 if applicable, clearer documentation in terms of optimization
of mpi datatypes, and usage of serialization lib.
rd
https://github.com/boostorg/mpi/pull/49
On 15/07/2017 14:05, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
Hi,
I just realized that people with a platform boost installed had their
1.64 distrib building for the wrong reasons... (as long as a "correct"
get_data is included, it can come from /usr...).
Hi,
I just realized that people with a platform boost installed had their
1.64 distrib building for the wrong reasons... (as long as a "correct"
get_data is included, it can come from /usr...).
So, considering:
a) Since the 1.65 process is ongoing, huge merges should be avoided.
b) The lib n
On 14 July 2017 at 20:40, Richard via Boost-mpi
wrote:
>
> Hi Alain,
>
> please don't get me wrong.
> I would certainly appreciate merging the develop branch to the master to
> get improvements and new features in boost.mpi.
> And if develop is well tested already, I do not see any reason not to
>
Hi Alain,
please don't get me wrong.
I would certainly appreciate merging the develop branch to the master to
get improvements and new features in boost.mpi.
And if develop is well tested already, I do not see any reason not to
merge it.
But I'm not in charge...
I just think the merge deserves to
Hi Richard,
On 14/07/2017 18:54, Richard via Boost-mpi wrote:
Hi Alain,
I'm not a boost developer so I'm not sure what boost's policies are.
In my opinion merging develop to master and fixing the regression are
two separate issues, which should get addressed separately.
I think taking a broken
Hi Alain,
I'm not a boost developer so I'm not sure what boost's policies are.
In my opinion merging develop to master and fixing the regression are
two separate issues, which should get addressed separately.
I think taking a broken master as an "excuse" to merge a development
branch is not a good
On 07/14/2017 09:35 AM, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
Hi,
As you probably know, 1.64 is not building. That reflect the fact that
serialization/master broke backward compatibility (in the detail area,
a part Boost.MPI should not rely on in the first place, but that's
another story).
M
Hi,
As you probably know, 1.64 is not building. That reflect the fact that
serialization/master broke backward compatibility (in the detail area, a
part Boost.MPI should not rely on in the first place, but that's another
story).
MPI/develop is ok in that respect, as a mater of fact develop s
12 matches
Mail list logo
