Well, since you're not Senator Richard Drake, I'll
tell you that we have found 6.5.9 to be a pretty
good release. We have run a couple of million
jobs using 6.5.9 and it has seemed better behaved
than previous releases, though I do not have data
correlated to lam release numbers.
The lam team generally does a good job of moving
in a forward direction from release to release.
I am not suggesting that you subvert your SQA
procedures, but that you may be cutting yourself
off from community support if and when you need
it by maintaining an attachment to legacy code.
Just my 2c.
Phil
Richard Drake wrote:
>
> this is Richard Drake at Sandia National Labs.
>
> we have been using and running our Software Quality Assurance
> processes on the lam 6.5.4 version of LAM/MPI.
> we are still using it just because we know it works.
|
