Subject: PARKBENCH Report

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 17:51:42 GMT

REPORT PUBLICATION
                        ------------------

(1) RESPONSE TO EDITOR'S COMMENTS
---------------------------------
A Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to you all. This is just a reminder to
all subcommittee leaders (db, rwh, ajgh, dw, th) that the deadline to get
your revised chapters to me is nigh (i.e. 1st Jan. 1994). After that I
shall do the best I can myself, but it may not be quite what you want.
Many congratulations to Tom Haupt who has already returned his revised 
chapter. I have undertaken, then, to do any overall editing, and submit 
the revised manuscript to "Scientific Programming" by 15th January.

Please send revised texts to my private e-mail, in order to avoid 
overloading pbwg-comm with almost, but not quite, final texts.

      e-mail for revised texts:      [email-masked]

When I have the revised text ready for SP, I shall send it to them and 
also to Mike Berry at UT, so that he can replace the old CS-report version
and make it available over Netlib.

Other committee members will wish to know that the report is accepted for
publication, after minor revision to take account of the editor's comments.
The editor's comments have been sent to all subcommittee leaders for action.
The editor raised the following points that you may wish to comment on:

  (a) He wishes to call our "Chapters", "Sections", as was done when SP
      published the HPF report. Unless pushed by others, and given a good 
      reason, I will stick out to keep them called Chapters.

  (b) We have used "we" and sometimes "one" in the text. I shall convert all
      to "we", which is somehow more friendly.

  (c) He wishes us to try to use a consistent description of parallel 
      machines. Do we call them multi-processors, nodes or processors, MPP,
      replicated computers, message-passing computers, distributed-memory
      computers, etc., etc.  I shall do something about this next week, so
      input from other members now over pbwg-comm would be welcome.
 
  (d) He thought that the word "Public" could be removed from the title
      "Public International Benchmarks for Parallel Computers". I think
      we should retain the word in our title, as it emphasises the 
      importance of our 4th aim: that the benchmarks be in the public
      domain. 

The Southampton group is also planning an additional appendix of "Selected
Results", which will give about five log/log graphs with results from e.g.
the COMMS1 low-level, and the NAS parallel benchmark kernels. These would
illustrate the type of graphical front end that is envisaged. 

(2) COPYRIGHT
-------------
Jack Dongarra has suggested that the University of Tennessee play the same
role for the PARKBENCH report as Rice University has for the HPF report that
appeared in vol 2 Nos 1&2 (1993) of Scientific Programming (SP). That is to 
say that the University of Tennessee (UT) would keep the copyright (not Wiley 
who publish the journal), but that the material be dedicated to the public 
domain by UT with the consent of John Wiley (see first page of above-mentioned
issue of Scientific Programming). Reproductions can be made without payment 
provided attribution is made to UT and SP, and the report would be made freely
available electronically by UT and possibly other sites.

The above suggestion sounds very satisfactory to me, and we are lucky that
Rice University has already set a precedent that we can happily follow. I
propose that the PARKBENCH committee hand over to UT through Jack Dongarra
the formal negotiations with John Wiley & Sons over copyright of the PARKBENCH
report, to be conducted along the lines described in the last paragraph. This 
seems appropriate since this report has already been published by UT as a CS 
report, and technically UT probably holds the copyright now. If no serious
objections are made over e-mail by 15th January 1994, this will become the
policy of the committee, and Jack will have authority to proceed with
negotiations with Wiley on behalf of the PARKBENCH committee. I will remain 
responsible however for supplying the modified text, which will be made 
available over the network. 

I would ask Jack to correct immediately over pbwg-comm any errors or omissions
in my explanation above of the proposed copyright agreement. Would other
committee members also make their opinions known over pbwg-comm whether they
support or not the above procedure.

                      Best Regards
                         Roger Hockney
                      (PARKBENCH Chairman)

---

From: "Michael W. Berry" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 15:46:02 -0500

> support or not the above procedure.

I support the motion by Roger and Jack regarding the copyright
agreement.  I think this procedure will be the most trouble-free in
getting future reports published.

Regards,
Mike
---
Michael W. Berry     ___-___  o==o======   .   .   .   .   .
Ayres 114         =========== ||//         
Department of             \ \ |//__        
Computer Science          #_______/        [email-masked]
University of Tennessee                    (615) 974-3838 [OFF]
Knoxville, TN 37996-1301                   (615) 974-4404 [FAX]

---

From: Jack Dongarra <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 94 15:16:17 -0500

I believe we have the copyright issue straighten out with Wiley.
The copyright agreement will allow electronic distribution
of the report by us on an unlimited but non-exclusive basis.
I will sign the copyright statement on behalf of the committee.
Jack