What makes us Red Hat

Post by lima » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 9:58 PM UTC

tapoxi wrote: post #23

m348e912 wrote: post #4

Red Hat was primary reason it took me a lot longer to adopt Linux than it should have. Headbanging experiences with dependency hell and things not working as expected left me extremely discouraged. It wasn't until I dabbled a little with Solaris 7 and finally found Slackware that I realized that Linux could "just work". IMO Red Hat's success was primarily based on the critical mass of support behind it, not because i…

I agree, but they've certainly come a long way. When I started with Red Hat 6.2, the dependency hell of installing RPMs from random websites and using the (almost never functional) up2date left me with an awful taste in my mouth as I jumped ship to Debian and the "just works" experience of apt-get. After switching to Fedora because we're using CentOS at work, I've come to like it. DNF and yum are fine replacements fo…

Post by lima » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 10:00 PM UTC

infodroid wrote: post #93

duozerk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has always enjoyed the reputation of being the most bulletproof distro if you could afford it. I've always heard that said about Debian more than about Red Hat (though Red Hat certainly is pretty stable). Red Hat has a lot more success in businesses though because you can get contractual support; which may not only be useful if you don't want to get the skills in-house but also because your own customer may contrac…

Debian also has an impressive reputation for quality. In many cases it has achieved, through its vast user and developer network, what Red Hat could only achieve through paid staff and commercial resources. But this is not true in all areas, especially in some aspects that matter to companies such as training/certification and having good up-to-date documentation. And as a volunteer-driven project, I don't think Debi…

Post by Godel_unicode » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 10:21 PM UTC

milesrout wrote: post #162

vacri wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Atlassian software is Open Source but not Free Software. You can download it, inspect it, and run it... but you need a paid license to keep it running. The same is true of RHEL, because CentOS is effectively "RHEL without a paid license".

>You can download it, inspect it, and run it... but you need a paid license to keep it running. Then it is not open source. Open source has a strict definition, from the OSI.

Post by yuhong » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 10:28 PM UTC

bonzini wrote: post #160

yuhong wrote: post #36

OT, but I wonder when Lennart Poettering was hired at Red Hat.

I think about 10 years ago. I was hired 8 years ago and he had been around for a while.

Post by snuxoll » Wed, Apr 05, 2017, 10:33 PM UTC

keithpeter wrote: post #129

houst0n_ wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess unity was the only thing driving Mir then? Is dropping one the same as dropping both? Seems like good news to me, having a significant player like canonical contributing to the community instead of fragmenting without much benefit can't be bad can it? I don't use it on the desktop anyway, but I hope that moves in this direction are rewarded by the community.

My (limited) understanding is that Gnome includes Wayland as an integral component, and so reverting to Gnome as default desktop for 18.04 will preclude use of the Mir graphical server.