Red Hat Continues Pleading The Case For Its CentOS Changes

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Red Hat Continues Pleading The Case For Its CentOS Changes

Taking many by surprise was the news last week of CentOS 8 being EOL'ed next year as what has been a popular downstream of Red Hat Entrprise Linux that is free of charge and often adapted for use within large organizations. Instead, IBM-owned Red Hat is looking to position CentOS "Stream" in front of RHEL as its upstream. That still isn't sitting over well for many and today is a new post on the CentOS Blog...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Red-Hat-CentOS-Pleading-Cont

[birdie]

No one cares, IBM.

We have OL and soon a RHEL based distro by CloudLinux and a number of others.

[cynic]

They're still trying to convince us that this is good for CentOS Stream (and maybe it is), but, fact is, nobody cared about CentOS Stream before and nobody does now.
People want CentOS, not CentOS Stream.

[mmmbop]

I really have to commend Michael on this post. It's really balanced and informative, on a subject that has been pretty contentious.

Re: "But the move less so for those looking for a free lunch in the form of CentOS (non-Stream)." that was my initial take too, but I think the one exception is that people using CentOS didn't get the full RHEL experience: you always had to wait a long time for the latest release, and sometimes there'd be a delay before patches came out. (I don't have hard numbers on how long it'd take for a security patch though) Paying by waiting a bit is not a very high price to pay for a full enterprise OS that you weren't contributing to though. A RHEL subscription also gave you access to docs and support. Just saying that you didn't get the exact same lunch experience as those that paid.

I personally think CentOS stream makes a lot of sense: the freeloaders now contribute back by providing some advance testing, (but shouldn't expect major breakage) and in exchange get a stable (in ABI terms) OS target and earlier releases. They still get something more stable than Fedora, and it's still free.

[EarthMind]

This project depends on its community and the majority of the community dislikes this move. What more needs to be said about this to say that it's a bad move?

[duby229]

You know what, I think I'm starting to change my mind... All of you guys that are pissed because you can't mooch off of an outdated so called "stable" but -actually- unstable distro, maybe you -should- move to mooching off of Oracle.... Go ahead make that switch.... Mooch away....

EDIT: If Redhat died, what exactly do you think would happen to CentOS, Oracle, SuSe, etc.... None of them can be what Redhat is, none of them care about Open Source like Redhat does...

[andre30correia]

IBM not RedHat, redhat no longer exists in pratice

[duby229]

IBM not RedHat, redhat no longer exists in pratice

The man this article references is a long time Open Source developer, not an IBM employee. This isn't coming from a corporate office, this is coming from the personal blog of a man that cares about Open Source!!

[cynic]

The man this article references is a long time Open Source developer, not an IBM employee. This isn't coming from a corporate office, this is coming from the personal blog of a man that cares about Open Source!!

yes. It has been confirmed by several reliable sources that this has been a RH move not imposed by IBM. And this make it even more unexplainable.

[Sonadow]

All I see are a bunch of freeloaders screaming "WAH I NO LONGER HAVE A $0.00 CLONE OF RHEL SO I AM GOING TO COMPLAIN TO EVERYBODY AS THOUGH I AM SOME FUCKING BIGSHOT IN THE OPENSOURCE WORLD".