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?

Stick with SL. CentOS, historically, has mapped one-to-one with the
contents of RHEL. SL has been willing to add very, very useful
components to the basic build, particularly hooks kto access
third-party repositories such as EPEL and RPMfusion. Those are
invaluable to work I do every day, and save me work burining new
virtual machines or doing base installs.

>  - If nothing changes and SL continue to be build from SRPMs (with a huge
> delay compared to CentOS)

See above. The delay is not "huge", and I'm often forced to schedule
package updates for maintenance windows, anyway. A churning set  of
updates is begging for environment instability in production
environments. I've often locked down "snapshots" of yum repositories,
and so that all production hosts work from the same locked down repo,
and left ongoing updates active in a separate repo. The RPM contents
are hardlinked among them to save disk space on the yum server or
network file share: it's pretty effective.

>  - If SL dies to be replaced by CentOS at CERN and Fermi Lab
>
> Feel free to add new scenarios.

CERN manages to create a black hole and the Earth is eaten, and any
astronauts in orbit fly off and colonize Europa?