I would like to see a SIG/Scientific Linux or SIG/Scientific instead of SIG/HEP.
Dave On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 04:10:06PM -0500, ~Stack~ wrote: > On 5/6/21 3:21 PM, Yasha Karant wrote: > > Excerpt from a previous post on this matter: > > > > On Thu, 2021-05-06 at 02:43 -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > The misfeatures you've groused about are not due to AlmaLinux, they're > > straight RHEL problems. Let's assign blame and credit where they are > > due. > > End excerpt. > > > > Presumably, Rocky Linux (IBM RHEL "clone") does have the same > > "misfeatures"? Would one of the after-EL repos (ElRepo et al.) be > > willing to produce an alternative set of RPMs to address the > > "misfeatures"? Would Alma or Rocky or ... ? No point in mentioning > > Fermilab/CERN -- SL8 will never exist. > > Since Rocky is aiming for exact 1:1 compatibility then I would say that > there won't be much deviation there. > > However, there are a number of Special Interests Groups forming around > Rocky. I know that when you look at the member list of groups like the Rocky > SIG/HPC some of the names (and edu's associated) are quite well known. Even > though Rocky _just_ released their first RC, there is already development > underway for HPC support packages for Rocky. Several of the SIG's are > gearing up for development and it won't surprise me if several are ready at > or near official Rocky release (soon!). > > If there was interest in a SIG/HEP I have no doubt they'd help carve out a > community. I know you've voiced in the past you wanted an education or > commercial entity backing your HEP operating system and you won't fully get > that with Rocky. But if enough in the HEP community got together to form a > Rocky SIG it might be easier to address the concerns you have with the OS > tools already built for you. > > Hope that helps. > ~Stack~