201–210 of 642 posts
Interesting development. What's the current difference between RHEL and Oracle Linux? Our institution used to be an RHEL shop, but switched to OL -- I just assumed that RHEL was historical at this point. [edit -- thanks for the answers. I realize now that my memory failed me... I mis-remembered that Oracle bought RedHat, not IBM.]
Presumably one big benefit is not having to deal with Oracle who are infamously difficult to deal with.
Wow. I kind of new this day was coming. I work in engineering / science (not comp. sci or developing) and all our software vendors are Windows or RHEL support only. Although if you know your way around linux any flavor will do, but RHEL is the "standard" for support. It's kind of like "insurance." We expect this to compile / work for RHEL and NOTHING else, because RHEL is stable, predictable, and boring. I've run mos…
This is awful. It's proof of the downsides to the IBM acquisition, which I think we all knew was coming. Imagine if you were running a business, and deployed CentOS 8 based on the 10 year lifespan promise. You're totally screwed now, and Red Hat knows it. Why on earth didn't they make this switch starting with CentOS 9???? Let's not sugar coat this. They've betrayed their users. I personally run a CentOS 7 server (as…
Sadly, the danger of running on free software.
Even more sadly, this puts a bad taste in peoples mouths, making them hesitant to start new projects on free software.
This is awful. It's proof of the downsides to the IBM acquisition, which I think we all knew was coming. Imagine if you were running a business, and deployed CentOS 8 based on the 10 year lifespan promise. You're totally screwed now, and Red Hat knows it. Why on earth didn't they make this switch starting with CentOS 9???? Let's not sugar coat this. They've betrayed their users. I personally run a CentOS 7 server (as…
Wonder if the web hosting industry will rebel and build another RHEL clone project that just gets the 10-year supported patches. Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? A really big chunk of the world's traditionally shared hosted websites run on CentOS, because most commercial control panel packages and hosting automation systems are built for that. A rebadged CentOS is also AWS's default distro. Wonder of…
I think that's a gray area. For example RHEL has some support branches where they'll produce security updates for minor updates. For example you can pay a lot of money and you'll get RHEL 7.2 with security updates. They won't release sources for those packages unless you'll ask for those packages (you, as a paid client, not you as nobody in the Internet). But if you'll ask sources and then publish those sources in the internet again and again, so other entity like CentOS or whatever could pick them up and build CentOS 7.2 LTS, they will terminate your contract.
So that's a weakness in GPL. You won't break any law, but they'll just terminate contracts with those who publish those sources. So those sources are effectively unavailable for a large public.
Currently they publish their mainstream branch sources to the public. But they could stop doing that any time and only provide those sources to their clients on request.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a money grab, pure and simple. They've (Redhat, let alone IBM) done it before (see below). What happens in practice with this sort of "rolling release" is users end up patching endlessly in production, which no sane person or organization would ever want to do. This was the exact situation for another Redhat acquisition for years now. JBoss EAP and community editions (wildfly now I suppose), everyone who could m…
Except IBM thinks that this will convert everyone to RHEL licenses and I'm positive that is not what's going to happen. Ubuntu is already the default for people with ML pipelines and more and more vendors are targeting Ubuntu first for their software. CentOS will be effectively dead for a lot of companies starting next year (or 2024). (At least we aren't planning on licensing 10^5 systems on RHEL...). I imagine for t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wonder if the web hosting industry will rebel and build another RHEL clone project that just gets the 10-year supported patches. Red Hat still has to release the patches, right? A really big chunk of the world's traditionally shared hosted websites run on CentOS, because most commercial control panel packages and hosting automation systems are built for that. A rebadged CentOS is also AWS's default distro. Wonder of…
FAQ: CentOS Stream Updates @ Red Hat[0] Q: What does this mean for users of CentOS Linux? The creation of CentOS Stream provides a new mechanism for partners and community members to add innovation to the next version of RHEL as it’s being built instead of after it’s built. We also recognize that there are different kinds of CentOS Linux users, and we are working with the CentOS Project Governing Board to tailor prog…
I fully expect this to happen again. CentOS will wither and die because no one actually needs the cutting edge repo -- Ubuntu has a way better process for this. RHEL is build on open source. They publish their SPRM packages. A bunch of people will grab these and start bootstrapping DentOS and everyone will move to this. IBM will be sliced up by PE and RedHat will be owned by someone else. 10 years will go by and RHEL will acquire the leading "DentOS" and today's DevOps will be tomorrow's greybeards and will patiently wait for EentOS to emerge.
Every time a corporation takes over an open source project it absolutely ruins it. We need some kind of "enterprise open source cabal" of people who can work on open source projects without any IP or copyright going to the company so the companies can't unilaterally screw the project.
Wow. I kind of new this day was coming. I work in engineering / science (not comp. sci or developing) and all our software vendors are Windows or RHEL support only. Although if you know your way around linux any flavor will do, but RHEL is the "standard" for support. It's kind of like "insurance." We expect this to compile / work for RHEL and NOTHING else, because RHEL is stable, predictable, and boring. I've run mos…
I see it as gradually hurting them, as organizations switch to other server Linux versions, and that diminishes the value of RHEL knowledge.