Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by muzzdiez

1) Message boards : Application Code Discussion : Pull request not having any attention--is that expected? (Message 70221)
Posted 5 Dec 2020 by muzzdiez
Post:
For now, no, as I consider it the problem of Milkyway, not BOINC itself. Or do you mean BOINC type of Milkyway applications?
2) Message boards : Application Code Discussion : Pull request not having any attention--is that expected? (Message 70217)
Posted 4 Dec 2020 by muzzdiez
Post:
Hi all,

I have a specific hardware platform that has Elbrus-8C CPU on board, and I've had some time porting Milkyway (along with some other projects, like RakeSearch and LHC@home) onto it: both as a proof-of-concept that BOINC may be run in anonymous platform mode on Elbrus, and as a compatibility and portability test for Milkyway. Finally I've had success in it, and I made a pull request to Milkyway's upstream: https://github.com/Milkyway-at-home/milkywayathome_client/pull/81

I even had a continuous run of BOINC with NBody and Separation on the host https://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/show_host_detail.php?hostid=807088 for about a year since, and I consider it proven that these fixes I've done really made Milkyway apps compatible with Elbrus, and possibly, other alternative platforms like ARM, MIPS, SPARC, RISC V, etc.

But there's nearly a year has been passed since I did this, and I have neither any reaction to pull request mentioned, nor any conclusion from maintainers, to merge it or close without merge for some reason. But code isn't abandoned, commits are pushed and even other pull requests are merged, so development is active there.

Is there a chance anybody have an idea how I can draw some attention to my pull request? I'm up to add more Elbrus stations to my BOINC pack, and it would be much better if modern upstream is compatible with Elbrus, not just my year-old fork, so I clone, build, and go--instead of cloning current upstream and applying a diff I suggested in my pull request, to it.




©2022 Astroinformatics Group