Re: MPICH2 packaging
On 16 June 2009 at 16:28, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
| On 16/06/09 at 09:24 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > On 16 June 2009 at 10:06, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
| > | On 15/06/09 at 18:32 -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
| > | > Hello Pavan,
| > | >
| > | > Thank you for the inquiry. I've somewhat left MPICH for now (focusing
| > | > on OpenMPI, which I don't maintain but use), and assigned its
| > | > maintenance to the Debian Scientific Computing team. But I think there
| > | > are others very interested in MPICH2, and am copying the debian-science
| > | > list to gauge interest.
| > |
| > | (Adding Camm Maguire, the LAM maintainer as Cc)
| >
| > That address has been out of commission for a while; Camm used to work there
| > but AFAIK no longer does. I don't have the replacement address handy though.
[ I do now, thanks to a bounce analyser at @enhanced.com / @intech.com --
camm@maguirefamily.org it is and this time I made sure I wrote it down in ~/.bbdb ]
| > | This raises an interesting question: if we package mpich2, couldn't we
| > | drop mpich(1) and LAM from Debian? Are there cases where it's more
| > | interesting to use mpich v1 or LAM than mpich2 or OpenMPI?
| >
| > As a former Open MPI co-maintainer: yes, LAM is to be deprecated one day as
| > Open MPI is actively developed whereas LAM is dead. On the other hand, Open
| > MPI is available on only a subset of architectures. It's tricky.
| >
| > That said, getting good MPICH2 in would be super too!
|
| Would you want to co-maintain it?
I already offered Pavan my help, but I would at this point prefer to keep
this informal. I have >> 100 packages and simply not that much capacity
left. Plus, my own MPI needs are (at least for now) fulfilled by Rmpi using
Open MPI.
Dirk
--
Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.
Reply to: