On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:02:49PM +1000, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > On Sunday, 21 August 2022 8:49:05 AM AEST Nilesh Patra wrote: > > So, are you still interested in this package? If not, I'll drop you from > > the field in next upload -- so as to set reasonable expectations. > > I'm still interested, but still unable to attend it. So fair enough, feel > free to remove me if you think that's the best as I'm unlikely to be able > to spend any time on the package this year (or even longer), unless > someone wants to sponsor the effort... I'll remove you for now then. If you find a sponsor, please add in yourself back. > Besides, shouldn't we focus our efforts on community fork "Apptainer" [1] > instead of maintaining this package? Yeah -- maybe it is a good opportunity to discuss it and have your opinion on it. This situation has been very confusing for me. Sylabs singularity CE seems to sync up a lot of code with apptainer in many releases. The announcement page[2] and reading the release changelogs make me even more confused as to what is really going on. A while back, I found a reddit comment[3] from the current maintainer of sylabs singularity which has a statement: | At this point there it appears that Apptainer 1.0 will be very close | to SingularityCE 3.9 which we released recently, given | the picks from SingularityCE into the code base. And so I am not entirely sure if it makes sense to package apptainer separately or not. And what would be the implications et. al. What do you think? Also, @Andreas was doing some work on apptainer front - there is even a repo here[4]. @Andreas, do you have some update about this? > [1]: https://apptainer.org/ [2]: https://apptainer.org/news/community-announcement-20211130/ [3]: https://www.reddit.com/r/HPC/comments/r61bto/comment/hmspn72/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 [4]: https://salsa.debian.org/hpc-team/apptainer -- Best, Nilesh
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature