Skip to content

Conversation

mckenziephagen
Copy link
Contributor

There was a brief discussion at one of the monthly roundup meetings about Singularity vs. Apptainer. In our MRIQC protocol paper, we refer to it as Apptainer and link out to this documentation, so at minimum, I think we need to flag that anywhere in this documentation where you use singularity, you can substitute apptainer. @jhlegarreta mentioned that the reality of the situation is not so straightforward as "Singularity was renamed to Apptainer", but that does seem to be the most succinct way to explain it without getting into the behind the scenes business details.

@oesteban

Copy link
Contributor

@jhlegarreta jhlegarreta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks reasonable if we do not want to get into the behind scenes business.

@oesteban oesteban changed the title Add Apptainer warning to Singularity docs DOC: Add Apptainer warning to Singularity docs Jan 28, 2025
code review from Oscar

Co-authored-by: Oscar Esteban <[email protected]>
@oesteban oesteban merged commit 7bd6876 into nipreps:mkdocs Jan 28, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants