Skip to content

Replace the "tool_connection" fn with a "tool_connection2" #524

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rhc54
Copy link
Member

@rhc54 rhc54 commented Jun 13, 2025

The current "tool_connection" server module function was defined with a void return. This contrasts with most of the other module functions which characteristically return a pmix_status_t, thereby supporting a return status that indicates if the function is not supported or has been atomically completed.

Add a replacement "tool_connection2" function that is identical in signature except for returning a pmix_status_t instead of void. Deprecate the current "tool_connection" function.

The current "tool_connection" server module function was defined with a void return. This contrasts with most of the other module functions which characteristically return a pmix_status_t, thereby supporting a return status that indicates if the function is not supported or has been atomically completed.

Add a replacement "tool_connection2" function that is identical in signature except for returning a pmix_status_t instead of void. Deprecate the current "tool_connection" function.

Signed-off-by: Ralph Castain <[email protected]>
@rhc54
Copy link
Member Author

rhc54 commented Jun 13, 2025

Please use emoji reactions ON THIS COMMENT to indicate your position on this proposal.

  • You do not need to vote on every proposal
  • If you have no opinion, don't vote - that is also useful data
  • If you've already commented on this issue, please still vote so
    we know your current thoughts
  • Not all proposals solve exactly the same problem, so we may end
    up accepting proposals that appear to have some overlap
    This is not a binding majority-rule vote, but it will be a very
    significant input into the corresponding ASC decision.

Here are the meanings for the emojis:

  • Hooray or Rocket: I support this so strongly that I
    want to be an advocate for it
  • Heart: I think this is an ideal solution
  • Thumbs up: I'd be happy with this solution
  • Confused: I'd rather we not do this, but I can tolerate it
  • Thumbs down: I'd be actively unhappy, and may even consider
    other technologies instead
    If you want to explain in more detail, feel free to add another
    comment, but please also vote on this comment.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant