Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add slurm-llnl.

[Eric Bavier <ericbavier@openmailbox.org>]

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 12:11:27 +0100
Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public12@thebird.nl> wrote:

> 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 ;)

In debian, the "slurm-llnl" is a dummy package to help users
transition to the new "slurm-wlm" package.

`~Eric