Deprecation of LAM/MPI?
Patrice Dumas
pertusus at free.fr
Tue Dec 8 16:12:13 UTC 2009
On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 10:44:14AM -0500, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> There has been no public response to this, and Jussi has indicated in
> the referenced bugzilla that at least one former lam board member is
> advocating for the package's removal. The current plan is to block lam
> from rawhide. If someone decides later that they wish to take over
> ownership of lam, then we can always unblock it. However, this does
> mean that the few lam using packages out there will need to be rebuilt
> to remove their lam subpackages and dependency.
I doubt lam users are on this list: lam users are certainly users who
favor stability over change, and are likely not to be that much interested
in fedora, and even less in fedora development.
If I still used fedora, I would have liked to have lam kept in fedora, but
I don't use fedora anymore. In the end it really depend how much you want
to keep/attract users interested in stability versus the cost of maintaining
software for those users given that fedora is unlikely to be in their
distributions of choice.
--
Pat
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list