[task #15653] Submission of Maneage

[Mohammad Akhlaghi]

Follow-up Comment #6, task #15653 (project administration):

> I tried to come up with a criterion on what mistakes "slipped through
fingers" are acceptable
In software terminology, these things are known as bugs. Things the author did
not intend to happen in the final product, but were missed due to the
complexity of the whole/larger project and limited time. 

As soon as someone finds/reports a bug, the author will fix it. 

This is the case here and has been demonstrated in previous messages on this
thread.

If I had not implemented your bug-reports, you had reason to complain. But
demanding that any project be bug-free from day one is absurd.


> The point of your package is bit-to-bit reproducing, isn't it?
Not for the software (like GNU Guix), but for mostly the output data of the
analysis. When built on different OSs or Kernel versions for example, the
software will necessarily be different from the bit-wise perspective. But this
does not necessarily mean that the output data are different (the software
authors may/will have accounted for the difference in low-level
architecture).

The reason I put "mostly" is that for some scenarios in statistical analysis
with high performance computing (parallel execution on many clusters), it is
also impossible to have bit-wise identical data outputs. In such cases, users
can implement statistical verification

In fact, we recently published a paper on this project in IEEE's Computing in
Science and Engineering, where we also discuss this point:
https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2021.3072860 (open-access), or you can see the
version on arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.03018



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?15653>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.nongnu.org/