Boost logo

Boost-MPI :

Subject: Re: [Boost-mpi] Develop VS master
From: Hal Finkel (hfinkel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-14 15:30:38

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).
> MPI/develop is ok in that respect, as a mater of fact develop seems to
> pass its tests on all the platforms I have access to (linux with g++
> icpc and intel MPIs).
> I proposed in February which
> is a merge from develop on master, hoping it would be in for 1.64. It
> is my opinion that develop should be regularly merge on master after
> proper testing, but that opinion is not shared by all the people with
> merge authorization.
> You can read the discussion in
> for details. Basically the argument against merging is that it would
> break some antique platform, but I was unable to get the informations:
> which platform, what breaks, compile error messages etc...
> It's been suggested to only move changes to master through cherry
> picking, which I'm against since I think it's a maintenance nghtmare
> that waste contributor's time and efforts.
> So right now, what I would like to see is a merge of develop to master
> or a clear description of what to be fixed in develop preventing that.
> The pro and cons I can think of:
> - Master is broken anyway
> - All the test I was able to perform passed ok
> - develop has some interesting features (cartesian communicator,
> variable size versions of global operations to name some)
> - If I do the merge, I'll be both the guy who submitted the pull
> request and the one validating the pool request, which is not good
> practice IMO.
> - some test are failing in
>, but
> the only messages I could get indicates a configuration error (some
> flag is used that is not supported by the compiler).
> - linked to the previous problem: I only have access to some platform
> (linus, intel and gnu compilers, Intel and some OpenMPI). As you know,
> the cross product of plateform/MPI/compiler version is...big.
> So, I would like to have your input on that issue (maybe through
>, maybe not ?) and, very
> important, if you could test develop on your platform and share the
> results.
> Do you think we should try to get develop on master for the 1.65 ?

Yes, please. My deployment builds at ALCF now pull in boost.mpi master
in order to work around this problem.


> Regards,
> Alain
> On 14/07/2017 10:17, Alain Miniussi via Boost-mpi wrote:
>> Please see the discussion in:
>> I'm going to send an email to the list to see what we can do.
>> Regards
>> Alain
>> On 13/07/2017 20:20, Richard via Boost-mpi wrote:
>>> Dear Boost MPI developers and maintainers,
>>> since none of the developers or maintainers commented on the ticket
>>> within the last half a year, I would like to make sure you are aware of
>>> this bug:
>>> Could someone please see to it that this does not make it to the next
>>> release?
>>> It's really not difficult to fix and I think it's pretty bad this made
>>> it to boost 1.64.
>>> But now it's even in 1.65.0 beta 1!!
>>> Why doesn't the simple fix in the develop branch of boost mpi get
>>> merged?
>>> (
>>> I would be really grateful if boost 1.65.0 had a working boost mpi
>>> again.
>>> Best,
>>> Richard
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Boost-mpi mailing list
>>> Boost-mpi_at_[hidden]
>> _______________________________________________
>> Boost-mpi mailing list
>> Boost-mpi_at_[hidden]
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-mpi mailing list
> Boost-mpi_at_[hidden]

Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory

Boost-Commit list run by troyer at