On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Bryan Che <bche@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We are doing most of this work upstream in the Condor community. So, > the development work is not Fedora-branded. Great! > Do you mean a custom Fedora spin? I'd love eventually to have this as a > first-boot option on a standard Fedora distribution where users can > opt-in to donating CPU cycles. That sort of discussion is a ways out I think, but its probably appropriate as a vision statement in your SIGs page. > To clarify: if we host the live scheduler at Fedora, would we still > brand this as a Fedora project even if we support having other platforms > donate CPU cycles? An actual scheduler service that runs on Fedora project infrastructure... yes I would support branding it as a Fedora project. Since I've no idea what is needed to actual host a scheduler, you'll have to have a discussion with infrastructure concerning required resources and then bring a summary of that discussion back to fab. I'd want to know what the resource burn for a scheduler is expected to be. If we are doing a scientific task initially, do we have to commit to storing a large data or results set on Fedora infrastructure as well as the scheduler? -jef _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
