Ever since with the disapperance of a key dev who held half the pillars of CentOS, it's not surprising that it happens to end like this. At least the SL effort is backed by a few research labs funded by a government (which hopefully, will sustain for quite some time)
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Victor Helsing <scintill...@gmail.com> wrote: > You have performed a great service setting up the forum. It has been quite > helpful for a lot of people, and long overdue. > > Your comments on CentOS are exactly correct. I think very few people > actually take much pleasure in the events there, since CentOS has been a > great service to the community for many years. Their development crew seems > to be under a lot of stress and not responding perfectly. > > It does make a striking contrast with the supremely helpful people I've > dealt with on the Scientific side though. I hope they get their issues > resolved soon. > > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:46 PM, john h outlan <joutlan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:39 PM, john h outlan <joutlan...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:31 PM, curriegrad2004 >>> <curriegrad2...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Can you link to the forums so we can all discuss stuff on there. It >>>> would also be nice if somebody created a #sl channel on freenode too >>>> ;) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Hi....the forum link is http://scientificlinuxforum.org. It's up to 155 >>> members today. We're getting many CentOS "refugees" as of late at the rate >>> of about 4 or 5 per day :) The Survey notice has been posted there under >>> Announcements. >>> >> >> to clarify: we are pleased at the forum that we gain 4 or 5 members or >> more per day, steady. It's a lot of work and I'm actually out of pocket on >> it. We are not pleased with a CentOS demise. We don't allow any such >> meaningless remarks on the forum either, other than civil conversation >> and/or speculation in good conversation. Sorry for the waste of time. > >