Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Description of the PMIx standardization process #183

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Description of the PMIx standardization process #183

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

jjhursey
Copy link
Member

@jjhursey jjhursey commented May 4, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Acceptance Process Dates

The PMIx Community will update this section as the PR progresses through the acceptance process.

Date Link to discussion
Reading May 31, 2019 #183 (comment) Resolve to postpone.
Reading
Acceptance

@jjhursey jjhursey added the WorkInProgress Work In Progress label May 4, 2019
@jjhursey jjhursey mentioned this pull request May 4, 2019
Closed
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

jjhursey commented May 4, 2019

Please take a look and make sure I captured everything from Issue #181. A couple things that I did not include in this draft:

  • The class that is associated with a newly "Accepted" PR is still under discussion in Issue Creating PMIx interface "classes" based on stability #179. So that part of the PR will be missing and the PR associated with Issue Creating PMIx interface "classes" based on stability #179 will fill that in.
  • Concern was raised about a "reasonable" time limit on delaying progress so I left out the following bullet point until we can resolve that issue:
    • Anyone may request a delay in the process, for a reasonable amount of time, until they
      can review and participate in the discussion. This must be requested on the PR before
      the next teleconference.

SteVwonder
SteVwonder reviewed May 9, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@SteVwonder SteVwonder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @jjhursey for putting this together. Generally LGTM! Just a few minor nits (inline comments above).

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@SteVwonder
Copy link
Contributor

Reading back over #181, we did discuss adding GitHub templates for PRs and Issues. Do we want to split that out into a separate PR or include it here?

gvallee
gvallee reviewed May 10, 2019
View reviewed changes
README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@jjhursey
Fix typo, add link to wiki
ad18ea1 
Signed-off-by: Joshua Hursey <[email protected]>
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

@SteVwonder We can do that as separate PRs.

@jjhursey
A few more topos
3f25eb6 
Signed-off-by: Joshua Hursey <[email protected]>
@jjhursey
Improve wording around participation, and the teleconf role in the pr…
6e3e804 
…ogression to the next phase

Signed-off-by: Joshua Hursey <[email protected]>
@jjhursey jjhursey marked this pull request as ready for review May 10, 2019 20:11
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

I accidentally removed the Draft PR status from this PR. Unfortunately, GH doesn't have the means to put the PR back into the Draft PR state. I think this is ready for review. There are some modification that we know are coming, but those will come in as additional commits to this PR before it moves to Reading - which it is not ready for quite yet.

@jjhursey jjhursey removed the WorkInProgress Work In Progress label May 10, 2019
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

Notes from May 17, 2019 teleconf:

  • In this PR keep the language a little vague with dissenting opinions and questions have been addressed.
  • Followup with discussion in Issue Proposed Changes to Standardization Process #181 on more specific language. Which will be a separate PR.
  • This PR will be presented for Reading on the May 31, 2019 meeting.

@jjhursey jjhursey changed the title Description of the PMIx standarization process Description of the PMIx standardization process May 17, 2019
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

Reading scheduled for the May 31, 2019 teleconference.

Use this comment to collect Straw Poll results.

  • You may vote anytime before the scheduled meeting.
  • The poll closes at the scheduled meeting.
  • If you approve the Reading of this PR indicate by placing a 👍 emoji on this comment.
  • If you do not approve the Reading of this PR indicate by placing a 👎 emoji on this comment. Then follow up with either suggested changes to the PR or an additional comment on the PR describing your concern for discussion.

abouteiller
abouteiller requested changes May 24, 2019
View reviewed changes
README.md
- If no changes to the PR result from the discussion then the PR can be considered for "**Acceptance**" without the need for another "**Reading**".
- If changes are made to the PR (with reasonable exceptions for minor spelling/grammar changes) then another "**Reading**" must be scheduled (See Phase 2) to allow interested parties to review the changes. This will include another "**Straw Poll**".
- If major changes are required to the PR the author(s) should consider a separate, replacement PR, and marking the original PR as "**Withdrawn**".
* If no dissent is voiced then the PR can be considered for "**Acceptance**" as early as the next teleconference.
Copy link
Contributor

@abouteiller abouteiller May 24, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This requirement is too stringent. This can be understood as veto power, which would make any progress impossible.
According to the issue we have plan to address that point, but I wanted to leave a 'change requested' mark until that gets done.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we can reword to:

If all dissenting opinions and questions have been addressed then the PR can be considered for "Acceptance" as early as the next teleconference.

Leaving the definition of addressed open. We will need to more crisply define that.

@SteVwonder SteVwonder mentioned this pull request May 24, 2019
Closed
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

Per teleconf:

@jjhursey
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of PR #193

@jjhursey jjhursey closed this Jul 24, 2019
@jjhursey jjhursey deleted the process-pr-181 branch July 24, 2019 15:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@rhc54 rhc54 rhc54 left review comments

@SteVwonder SteVwonder SteVwonder left review comments

@gvallee gvallee gvallee left review comments

@abouteiller abouteiller abouteiller requested changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@jjhursey @SteVwonder @gvallee @rhc54 @abouteiller