Skip to content

Conversation

@rhc54
Copy link
Contributor

@rhc54 rhc54 commented Apr 15, 2016

…as the community has decided to not do that release version. This incorporates a number of bug fixes that have been identified and repaired in the PMIx and OMPI code bases. Also includes several minor corrections to the PMIx code so it now supports run-thru without hanging on collectives involving a process that exits

…unity has decided to not do that release version. This incorporates a number of bug fixes that have been identified and repaired in the PMIx and OMPI code bases. Also includes several minor corrections to the PMIx code so it now supports run-thru without hanging on collectives involving a process that exits
@jsquyres
Copy link
Member

@hppritcha What do you think of putting this in v2.0.1? That way, we're not holding up v2.0.0 for stability of this new PMIx stuff, but since it won't affect backwards compatibility (and probably solves some bugs), we could put it in v2.0.1. Let's discuss Monday.

@jsquyres jsquyres added this to the v2.0.1 milestone Apr 15, 2016
@rhc54 rhc54 merged commit 6b38c0e into open-mpi:master Apr 15, 2016
@rhc54 rhc54 deleted the topic/pmix114 branch April 15, 2016 19:55
@hppritcha
Copy link
Member

we can put it in 2.0.1


sent from my smart phonr so no good type.

Howard
On Apr 15, 2016 1:52 PM, "Jeff Squyres" [email protected] wrote:

@hppritcha https://github.com/hppritcha What do you think of putting
this in v2.0.1? That way, we're not holding up v2.0.0 for stability of this
new PMIx stuff, but since it won't affect backwards compatibility (and
probably solves some bugs), we could put it in v2.0.1. Let's discuss Monday.


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1548 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants