On 28/02/25 3:00 pm, Dennis van Dok wrote: > On 27-02-2025 19:32, Nilesh Patra wrote: >> No words of wisdom, as such, but a question: >> >> Since singularity is very close to apptainer, do >> you think your energy could be better spent in maintaining >> singularity-container instead >> and trying to release that to stable instead of packaging apptainer? >> >> OTOH, If we are going ahead with apptainer anyway, maybe it makes sense to >> -rm singularity? > > It's a fair question. AFAIK the two projects have gone separate ways in > terms of how they are maintained and governed. I am not sure how close > they still are, or if there is an active effort to incorporate patches > in one direction or another, or both. > > If they are very similar indeed, then the packaging could also be very > similar, so the additional packaging effort could be small. If they are > very divergent, then there may actually be a case for having both. > > The reason I would focus on apptainer is that it is the software that is > mostly used in the high throughput computing community I am in. But > taking a look at both projects is probably a good idea.
OK. In that case, I will stop working on singularity-container for future releases, as some work on apptainer has started already and it'd be good to have that. Won't file RM request for singularity-container incase someone wants to pick it up in future. I did not add myself to uploaders yet, and it seems like a good decision in hindsight. New version would have been quite a bit of work and on my TODO. Not anymore. That's nice.
