On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:42:13PM -0500, Scott Brozell wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:46:15PM -0500, David A Case wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014, Jason Swails wrote:
> > on the GPU." We *should* establish a better mechanism for suggesting and
> > vetting requests for new GPU features. But I don't (yet) see that another
> > code fork is needed to accomplish this.
>
> 1.
> Why not create a 'new features' Severity bug in bugzilla
> and cc the am-dev list when it is created:
> Every developer should be subscribed to am-dev, so every developer
> gets notified. Those that want to vet can do so via bugzilla.
Hmm, emails from bugzilla to this list don't seem to work (yet).
> 2.
> I agree that existing-feature-bla may not merit another code fork.
> But let me throw out another code fork:
> heterogeneous-platform-ambermd
> Its design would be along the lines of the gromacs 4.6 rewrite
> where, eg, non-bonded forces, are offloaded to gpus or other compute resources.
Some were too fast for me, but here's the new feature report for this
http://bugzilla.ambermd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=258
scott
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Feb 18 2014 - 02:30:02 PST
