Teleconference 2018-07-11

Attendees:

Policy for granting developer access

• What is a non member able to do?
  • Can they submit an MR request (but not merge it)?
  • That sounds fine for introductory behavior
• Is the difference that Developers can merge their own MR?
  • Should be some vetting process, right?
  • Maybe say you can be a developer after some prescribed number of assisted merges (2? 3?)

Apologies for somewhat unstable merges at the end of June.

• ECP milestone deadlines pushed us to accept some merges that we would normally have waited on.
• We should be recovered from any instabilities.
• With that, let's be more vigilant about ECP deadlines.

Upcoming ECP Milestones

• Better Dynamic Types
• Rendering Topological Entities
• OpenMP

Ken: working on not requiring a device adapter tag for using a Dispatcher. Will use TryExecute under the covers to find a valid one. Mostly this cleans up the code quite a bit. It increases the use of vtkm::cont::Algorithm quite a bit. Added a way to pass vtkm::cont::ExecutionObjectBase classes to arguments that automatically get converted to the device the algorithm is actually run on.

There are a few instances where a worklet is tied to a specific device because it is holding some device specific structures (usually array portals). Usually this is easily fixed by passing arrays to Invoke with WholeArray* arguments. Sometimes you have to build ExecObject arguments, which is a little more complicated because you have to create dual control/execution objects. The biggest change so far is with particle advection integrators and evaluators, which I am working on right now.