Per discussion on the teleconf today, since the only OMPI member who
cares has a workaround in their packaging of Open MPI for library
versioning (Sun / ClusterTools), we have dropped this issue. When/if
someone cares about it enough in the future, they can re-open the
issue. I have filed a ticket to capture the idea for posterity:
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/1167
This RFC is now considered closed.
On Oct 15, 2007, at 3:00 PM, Paul H. Hargrove wrote:
Christian Bell wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Brian Barrett wrote:
Nooooo! :)
It would be good for everyone to read the Libtool documentation to
see why versioning on the release number would be a really bad idea.
Then comment. But my opinion would be that you should change based
on interface changes, not based on release numbers.
Yes, I second Brian. Notwithstanding what the popular vote is on MPI
ABI compatibility across MPI implementations, I think that
major/minor numbering within an implementation should be used to
indiciate when interfaces break, not give hints as to what release
they pertain to.
. . christian
I agree w/ Brian and Christian... version the file according to
*interface* chages, not releases. This is, as Brian mentions, all
explained very well in the libtool docs.
-Paul
--
Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov
Future Technologies Group
HPC Research Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
