*Troy scratches his head and sighs*
It's been a long week ... too long.
I guess ya'll now know what my idea's are now.  But those are just my 
idea's.  Although I am one of the more vocal leads of Scientific Linux, 
I am not the only lead developer.  Please take what I said with a grain 
of salt and realize that plans can change.  Right now, and probably for 
6 more months, this is all talk.
Until we start to see what RHEL6 looks like, we aren't really sure which 
direction to go.  Fedora has gone through some big changes, and I expect 
it will go through even more before it's ready for RHEL6.
But as I said at the very first, there will be a SL6.  Even if we use 
most all of CentOS's binaries, our goals are different, our communities 
are different.  We aren't planning on a complete merge.
Troy

Troy Dawson wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 03:06:51PM -0500, Troy Dawson wrote:
>>> Adrian Sevcenco wrote:
>>>> i am wondering the idea of common repositories is still in place...
>>> The answer is that there is talk of working more with CentOS on the
>>> next release.  We currently haven't hammered out many details, so
>>> there isn't really too much to say.
>> Ideally the upstream vendors' src.rpm at least could be identical, so
>> mirrors can hardlink them :)
>>
>> Also if the build processes of both groups can merge (I guess the main
>> guideline here is to do mimic as close as possible what the upstream
>> vendor does when building in order to keep binary compatibility) we
>> could even have a common pool of binary rpms, which would be a
>> gigantic step forward!
>>
>>> One thing I do want to point out, because the rumor keeps comming
>>> up.  There will be a Scientific Linux 6.  We will keep our identity.
>>> We will not completely merge with CentOS.
>> Now, whether one follows up the release schedule of the upstream
>> vendor by the day or delays for further QA, or whether one adds some
>> packages, or removes/replaces some, that's something that maybe in
>> SL's jargon is a more extended definition of a "site". E.g in that
>> sense maybe the merger will make an über project that SL and CentOS
>> cut their package pools from in their own timing and collection
>> policy matching their different target groups?
> 
> Hi Axel,
> This is strictly off the list because it's still just ideas and some
> conversations.
> We are looking into using the actual binaries from CentOS 6 to make
> Scientific Linux 6.  Only changing the usual ones we need to to make
> Scientific Linux.  That would allow you to hard link 90-95% of the distros.
> We are still talking with some of the CentOS folk about how to get those
> binaries in a timely manner.
> Again, this is off the list.  This might not happen, but it might.  It's
> my goal at least.  Among other things, it would make creating a
> Scientific repo for CentOS a piece of cake.  As well as make it trivial
> to pull things into Scientific Linux that are already in CentOS Extra's.
> Anyway, it's still talk, so please don't spread it.  I just thought
> you'd like to know.
> Troy

-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/CSS  CSI Group
__________________________________________________