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.

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

Issue 175 make query chap #391

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

dsolt
Copy link
Contributor

@dsolt dsolt commented Jan 26, 2022

This PR moves functions related to querying the system in general to their own chapter. This leaves the chapter they were taken from very small, especially when accounting for #390 which also removes material from the same chapter. However,
yet another PR is forthcoming which will address what remains of the Chap_API_Sync_Access chapter.

Can squash this later which will get rid of this move, but I
do it this way so that you can see how we changed the text in
this new chapter instead of it all appearing as if it is new
text.

Signed-off-by: dsolt@us.ibm.com
@dsolt
Copy link
Contributor Author

dsolt commented Jan 26, 2022

This PR uses 2 commits in a slightly strange way that allows you to look at just the changes for the 2nd commit and see how the material in the new chapter changed from what it was before. That is hard to see if you just look at the combined changes.

@dsolt dsolt added the WorkInProgress Work In Progress label Jan 26, 2022
Especially separating out attributes from keys, moving query structure
to the start of the chapter and adding chapter headings, etc.

Signed-off-by: dsolt@us.ibm.com
@dsolt dsolt removed the WorkInProgress Work In Progress label Jan 26, 2022
@dsolt
Copy link
Contributor Author

dsolt commented Jan 27, 2022

Please use emoji reactions ON THIS COMMENT to indicate your position on this proposal.

You do not need to vote on every proposal
If you have no opinion, don't vote - that is also useful data
If you've already commented on this issue, please still vote so
we know your current thoughts
Not all proposals solve exactly the same problem, so we may end
up accepting proposals that appear to have some overlap
This is not a binding majority-rule vote, but it will be a very
significant input into the corresponding ASC decision.

Here are the meanings for the emojis:

Hooray or Rocket: I support this so strongly that I
want to be an advocate for it
Heart: I think this is an ideal solution
Thumbs up: I'd be happy with this solution
Confused: I'd rather we not do this, but I can tolerate it
Thumbs down: I'd be actively unhappy, and may even consider
other technologies instead
If you want to explain in more detail, feel free to add another
comment, but please also vote on this comment.

@jjhursey jjhursey added Eligible Eligible for consideration by ASC RFC Request for Comment labels Jan 31, 2022
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@dsolt
Copy link
Contributor Author

dsolt commented Feb 7, 2022

pmix-standard-query.pdf

Here is a pdf showing the changes to this chapter with green highlighting for new text, red for changed text and grey for moved text.

Signed-off-by:  dsolt@us.ibm.com
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Chap_API_Query.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
singular use of query vs queries in intro
permissable -> permissible
any keys -> any particular keys when describing what implementations must support
block of text that was accidentally not moved with the list of attributes that
  where moved.
similified -> simplified

Signed-off-by: dsolt@us.ibm.com
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member

jjhursey commented Mar 7, 2022

PMIx ASC 1Q 2022

  • Passed the first vote with revision exception: 10 yes / 1 no / 0 abstain
  • Failed the first vote without the revision exception: 9 yes / 2 no / 0 abstain
  • This is eligible for a second vote in the 2Q 2022 ASC quarterly meeting

@jjhursey jjhursey added the First Vote Passed ASC first vote passed label Mar 7, 2022
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member

PMIx ASC 2Q 2022

  • Passed the second vote: 11 yes / 0 no / 0 abstain
  • Will be merged into the next release

@jjhursey jjhursey added the Accepted as Stable ASC second vote passed. Accepted as Stable! label May 12, 2022
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member

Rebased version in #407

@jjhursey
Copy link
Member

Closing in favor of PR #407 - which is the same content, but rebased onto the current master

@jjhursey jjhursey closed this May 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Accepted as Stable ASC second vote passed. Accepted as Stable! Eligible Eligible for consideration by ASC First Vote Passed ASC first vote passed RFC Request for Comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants