Brian: I agree that we need to make more information available. While we've discussed changes slated for the AG3 release in various forums (retreats, supercomputing, townhalls) over the past year or so, this information is not widely available to the community. We'll work to remedy that with some descriptions of the path forward, which we can put up on the project webpages. That'll help to inform the community generally and encourage developer discussion. Until then, the most recent description of toolkit changes can be found in my slides from the retreat, specifically the last few pages which compare 2.x to 3.x and list some new functionality:
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/fl/flevents/ag/agr05/talks/agr05_uram_T_overview.pdf I remember the question of 'impact on existing shared apps and node services' coming up at the retreat. My response to it was that, by virtue of the existing architecture, shared apps and node services should be largely isolated from changes we will make in the AG3 cycle. There will certainly be some changes required, but it's a priority to me that the changes be minimized as much as possible. I'd like to remedy any lack of information that's out there, and you'll see efforts in the near term to do so. While we're in this intermediate state, let us know of questions so we can address them. Tom On 05/19/05 12:26, Brian Corrie wrote: > Hi Tom, > > Derek's comments are good ones... > > One of the things we talked about at the retreat was understanding what > AG 3.0 is going to look like. I think this is especially important for > those that are developing shared apps and node services. Do you have any > information on what is going to be changing? Any major architecture > changes and/or API changed are specifically important. > > Cheers, > > Brian > > > Derek Piper wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> >> Are there any goals/changes already being considered for AG3? It >> would be helpful for all of us to know what (if any) the basic changes >> already proposed are. >> >> Derek >> >> Thomas D. Uram wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve: >>> >>> You may have heard of the 'standards' committee, the purpose of which >>> is to standardize interfaces in the toolkit. Activities of this >>> group have not ramped up yet, but will do so soon. >>> >>> We're definitely interested in engaging the AG developer community >>> outside of Argonne in development discussions. If you're interested >>> in contributing ideas related to the software, whether in design, >>> functionality, or enhancements, they are most welcome. We've tried >>> to provide mechanisms for developers to get involved, such as AG >>> Enhancement Proposals for functionality and bugzilla for >>> enhancements. We will be trying to open this up to more community >>> involvement; the first step will be the creation of a developer >>> mailing list, with other steps to follow. Meanwhile, if you want to >>> discuss a particular aspect of the software, don't hesitate to start >>> the discussion here. >>> >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> >>> On 05/16/05 19:44, Steve Smith wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've heard passing mention of a committee being formed regarding AG >>>> version 3. What is the status of this, and what is the process for >>>> having an input to this? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
