[J3] [EXTERNAL] posts

[Ondřej Čertík]

Hi Dan and others,

Thank you for allocating the time for the GitHub repository report.

Regarding reviewing proposals, indeed, 202Y must be subordinate to F202X as Bill suggested. That is why I suggested to spend only 5 min per proposal. 

I talked with lots of people (both inside and outside of LANL) about the fact that the Committee sometimes does not give feedback for proposals submitted to it, and the overwhelming response is that the Committee's job is to give at least some general feedback for every proposal submitted to it. My own opinion is also that we absolutely have to give some feedback for every proposal.

I proposed one way to do that (5 min per proposal at plenary). I welcome alternative proposals how we could do that. If the plenary is not appropriate, then let's discuss an alternative. However, if no other alternative approach is suggested, then let's do the plenary, as opposed to not giving feedback at all.

Ondrej

P.S. Regarding "generic programming", I strongly suggest we do not spend time in the Data subcommittee doing things that we can do now more effectively at GitHub (the latest issue is https://github.com/j3-fortran/fortran_proposals/issues/125, and it links all the other issues regarding generics). The precious time at the meeting should be spend reviewing proposals that are "ready". Let's get a few proposals ready for "generic programming", and then we can discuss them at the Data subcommittee.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020, at 8:25 AM, Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) via J3 wrote:
>  The one exception could be papers relevant to generic programming, as 
> the Data subcommittee is nominally trying to spend some fraction of its 
> current effort on that longer goal. But given that, plenary is probably 
> not the appropriate forum even then. 
> 
> - Tom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > On Jan 22, 2020, at 9:20 AM, Bill Long via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>  On Jan 21, 2020, at 9:15 PM, Vipul Parekh via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >>  On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 12:52 PM Ondřej Čertík via J3
> >>  <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>  ..
> >>>  Second, I would like to propose an addition to the agenda:
> >>> 
> >>>  J3 GitHub proposals repository report O. Certik
> >>> 
> >>>  It would take about 5 min and an optional discussion (if there is interest, I can make it longer). It can be done on any day, Monday or Tuesday would both work.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  Third, we will be submitting proposals for this meeting for the most popular ideas from the J3 GitHub repository, and we would like to get feedback from the committee on each of them. These will targeting 202y. I know that the main effort is to get 202x out, but I would like to propose if we can spend 5min of plenary time on each proposal. ..
> >> 
> >>  Dan,
> >> 
> >>  Will the agenda for meeting 221 next month reflect the two proposals
> >>  by Ondřej, one to provide a report on the GitHub proposals repository
> > 
> > We usually schedule non-specific “tutorial” time in the agenda. That can be used for a report of this type. 
> > 
> >>  and the other to submit papers toward Fortran 202Y
> > 
> > Our current responsibility is to get F202X in shape. 202Y stuff should be subordinate to that. 
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Bill
> > 
> > 
> >>  based on the
> >>  extensive feedback and vibrant exchange of ideas at the repository?
> >>  The agenda as currently posted at the J3 website does not list either
> >>  of these items.
> >> 
> >>  I think it will be extremely valuable for Fortran if J3 can listen to
> >>  and collaborate with the online community at GitHub proposals
> >>  repository both of which can be served by accommodating Ondřej's ideas
> >>  toward the agenda.
> >> 
> >>  Thanks,
> >>  Vipul Parekh
> > 
> > Bill Long longb at cray.com
> > Principal Engineer, Fortran Technical Support & voice: 651-605-9024
> > Bioinformatics Software Development fax: 651-605-9143
> > Cray, a Hewlett Packard Enterprise company/ 2131 Lindau Lane/ Suite 1000/ Bloomington, MN 55425
>