[J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: posts

Jibben, Zach zjibben at lanl.gov
Wed Jan 22 17:15:08 EST 2020

I'd also like to encourage devoting at least the small amount of time Ondrej suggested to community-backed proposals. Given the request is not to shift the focus of the plenary, but only to spend a few minutes acknowledging our community, I think it should be a no-brainer. We want to make Fortran more useful for programmers using it, and I don't know of a more effective way to collect and consider programmer needs. And let's not forget these proposals are curated by our own committee members who are active on the GitHub page, based on quality and programmer interest.

Zach Jibben, PhD
CCS-2: Computational Physics and Methods
Los Alamos National Laboratory
505.665.0946  ·  MS D413

From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> on behalf of Milan Curcic via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 1:55:40 PM
To: General J3 interest list
Cc: Milan Curcic
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [J3] posts

Just chiming in to express my strong support for the consideration of proposals for 202Y in the meeting, as proposed by Ondrej.

Second, I'd love to be able to help the Committee's great work with Fortran development. For me, as for many others, it's not practically feasible to join the committee and attend meetings. However, there's a lot that can be done between meetings and there is a strong and willing community that Committee could tap into to delegate much of the tedious and hard work. The Github repo mentioned in this thread is a great example of it. I believe that together we can make Committee's work easier and more fun.


On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 2:42 PM Ondřej Čertík via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org<mailto:j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>> wrote:
Hi Brad,

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020, at 12:32 PM, Brad Richardson via J3 wrote:
> To point 1. Why would consensus be needed for feedback? Wouldn't it be
> sufficient to just recap discussions had as feedback? And any other
> feedback would be given offline by either members of the committee
> individually or members of the community?

Yes, it is sufficient to recap the discussion as a feedback, no consensus necessary. That's all I am asking for. I volunteer to recap it and post it to the particular GitHub issue.

> I would think that if the committee is actively engaged with the
> community that nearly all feedback from committee members would happen
> prior to the meeting anyways, and any time spent on proposals at the
> meetings would mostly be a formality and a chance to get the proposal
> on record.

That and also sometimes it's easier / more efficient to have a quick back and forth in person. But it's quick, since all the actual difficult technical discussion happened beforehand.

> I would hope that Certik's efforts with the Github repository are a
> significant step towards making the above a feasible workflow.

Thank you. I think it will work out great for the Committee if we give it a chance.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20200122/dca90ad9/attachment.htm>

More information about the J3 mailing list