RAJAPerf concerns
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 5
- Forks
- 1
- Avg merge
- 1d 13m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
We mentioned a few concerns at the meeting today.
- [ ] Make it more clear in the build section which versions of RAJA/camp/etc. go with what version of RAJAPerf. Probably mention our versioning scheme.
- [ ] Update the doc to the relevant RAJAPerf patch version.
- [ ] Differentiate between which versions of things can change (like the rocm/cuda/... version) and those that should stay the same.
- [ ] Make it clear that they must use consistent versions of RAJA and RAJAPerf and that its best to keep up to date with RAJAPerf releases. They should want to do this anyway as RAJA should improve over time.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the build-section documentation and the existing RAJAPerf version references. Document the compatible RAJA, camp, and RAJAPerf versions, explain the versioning scheme and patch version, distinguish changeable ROCm/CUDA versions from fixed dependencies, and state the need for consistent, current releases.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100