[Pgi-wg] High Capacity Use Case updated

[Morris Riedel]

Many thanks for your work - your work has been integrated into the document.

>-- -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>-- Von: pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] Im Auftrag von Mark Morgan
>-- Gesendet: Freitag, 3. September 2010 19:28
>-- An: pgi-wg at ogf.org
>-- Betreff: [Pgi-wg] High Capacity Use Case updated
>-- 
>-- I have uploaded the "High Capacity Computing" usecase document with
>-- revisions to address comments.  Summarized as follows:
>-- 
>-- * Comments from Morris Riedel
>-- 	- Clarify difference between HTC and HPC
>-- 		-- Based off of your comments embedded in the document itself, I
>-- have added a small clarification statement in the introductory paragraph
>-- 	- Title is confusing -- clarify
>-- 		-- Wasn't entirely sure what to do with this, so I changed the title
>-- to get rid of the "Traditional HPC User" portion, hopefully
>-- disambiguating the title.
>-- 
>-- * Comments from Etienne
>-- 	- The template is BAD
>-- 		-- The template is the exact one that we as a group decided on (more
>-- than once) to adopt.  Comment is therefor irrelevant and unhelpful.
>-- 
>-- * Oxana
>-- 	- Does not address necessity of common interfaces and standards
>-- 		-- No part of the use case requires those things, why should the use
>-- case have them?
>-- 	- Not sure how its different from the mid-range use case
>-- 		-- I believe that it is, but that is a subjective assertion and I am
>-- willing to accept that it isn't different.  If it isn't, then we can
>-- as a group decide to pick one or the other
>-- 	- Implementation suggestions all over the place
>-- 		-- I can't agree with this comment.  There are a number of places
>-- where implementations are given as examples, but they are not
>-- suggested as solutions
>-- 		-- I also describe some implementation details in the "How does it
>-- relate to PGI" which I agree shouldn't be in there, but we all agreed
>-- as a group to adopt that template, and the template asked for those
>-- items and so they are there.  In my opinion, they are there because of
>-- the template, but not part of the use case in general.
>-- _______________________________________________
>-- Pgi-wg mailing list
>-- Pgi-wg at ogf.org
>-- http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3550 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/pgi-wg/attachments/20100927/d7d20403/attachment.bin