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~