SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

February 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: Future of Scientific Linux
From:
Tom H <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Tom H <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 9 Feb 2014 07:57:40 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines) 
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Henrique C. S. Junior
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I'd like to know what people think about (possible) future scenarios for
> Scientific Linux. Let's say:
>  - If SL becomes a CentOS SIG (builded using the CentOS Core) does it still
> worth the time or will you change to CentOS?
>  - If nothing changes and SL continue to be build from SRPMs (with a huge
> delay compared to CentOS)
>  - If SL dies to be replaced by CentOS at CERN and Fermi Lab

What's the point of speculating? Or even pseudo-planning?

Have you read [1]?

[1] http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1401&L=scientific-linux-users&T=0&P=21431

ATOM RSS1 RSS2