From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public12@thebird.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add slurm-llnl.
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 12:11:27 +0100
Message-ID: <20160211111127.GA9815@thebird.nl>
References: <56bb7530.v5bvas2QpzoMjKMl%pjotr.public12@thebird.nl>
	<20160210220447.0917f1a1@openmailbox.org>
	<20160211081534.GA8987@thebird.nl>
	<20160211100801.GA6109@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42309)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pjotr2016@thebird.nl>) id 1aTpAe-0000Xa-HK
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:12:25 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pjotr2016@thebird.nl>) id 1aTpAa-0006Jj-HU
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:12:24 -0500
Received: from mail.thebird.nl ([95.154.246.10]:43602)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pjotr2016@thebird.nl>) id 1aTpAa-0006JV-Bl
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:12:20 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160211100801.GA6109@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 11:08:01AM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> > > I think we should rather use "slurm-wlm" if we are trying to
> > > dissambiguate with the "Slurm the Realtime network interface monitor".
> > The website https://computing.llnl.gov/linux/slurm/ suggests
> > otherwise. Also archlinux took this name
> > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/slurm-llnl/
> 
> And Debian, but we are free to use our own conventions. Do you think it
> is likely that we will package the other slurm? Otherwise, I would simply
> go with "slurm" now according to our package guidelines; and then we can
> still name the other slurm as slurm-nlm or similar.

There is already a slurm package. But it does something different. I
propose we do it my way, so outsiders understand it. Let them flock
over from Debian ;)

Pj.