[J3] [EXTERNAL] (SC22WG5.6187) RE: [ukfortran] October meeting visa invitation letter

Reuben D. Budiardja reubendb at ornl.gov
Wed Apr 29 08:46:47 EDT 2020

On 04/29/2020 07:31 AM, Milan Curcic via J3 wrote:
> GitHub is not a panacea and is not meant to replace live meetings, 
> calls, or even chat. I see it as "better email for developing software 
> and documents". It doesn't even mean to replace all email, but only 
> some. So I don't think doing everything on GitHub is the solution. 
> However for what I think is a significant fraction of committee work in 
> the time between the meetings, GitHub can provide powerful productivity 
> tools.
It does not have to be completely one or the other. I can certainly see 
that ideas can be developed and hashed out between meetings in Github, 
to a form suitable / complete enough for a "paper" submission to 
J3-Fortran, which then can be voted on by the committee, or fine-tuned 
during the meeting. This would be completely organic, whoever wants to 
join the discussion on Github, can do so.

I like that there is a sense of "finality" with submissions and voting 
via J3-Fortran. I guess I see it as an analog to a scientific paper 
being sent for review and publication. You can do all your work in the 
open, pre-publish it, get reviewed by close colleagues, etc, but at the 
end of the day you'd send it to a refereed journal for final review and 
publication. In this case it would be J3-Fortran and inclusion to the 

Some would rather do the work "independently" (i.e. within subgroups), 
during the meeting time, and/or not on GitHub, and that should be fine 
as well.

I am not sure it's productive to require one way or another, or that 
everything must be done ahead of time. As was mentioned before, for some 
the meeting time is probably the only dedicated time one has to work on 
the standard.


More information about the J3 mailing list