Hi, I have just read over the lengthy discussion on the subject, and we have had some internal discussion on this topic since the OFA meeting earlier in the year.
Without going into the many individual points: A Linux system in general has many many interdependencies, which are overseen by individual package and subsystem maintainers. They generally seem to manage just fine to keep things working seamlessly. When this is not the case, the issues are usually addressed based on direct input from customers, distro, or dependent system maintainers. Things become confusing when there are multiple POCs for a package, as with MPI in OFED. In regards to integrated QA, it should suffice to specify a version for MPI that have been tested with OFED/RDMA, and this version is something that OFED vendors can sort out, and communicate to distros. The specific source, however does not need to be re-packaged. Not packaging MPI in OFED does not eliminate the ability of the OFED maintainers and OFED users to interact with MPI maintainers to report issues. This notably, happens even with QA'd code, as its generally impossible to anticipate all issues at this level of complexity What is eliminated, is having to re-release the entire OFED package because of changes or updates in MPI. In summary, decoupling as much as possible, while referencing specific versions in QA testing, is fundamental for any integrated system, and I see no need for OFED to odd-man-out on this issue. At Novell we are therefore in favor of decoupling MPI from OFED. Regards, Sven _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
