Deprecation of LAM/MPI?

Patrice Dumas pertusus at
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.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list