121–130 of 555 posts
The branding here I think is a big issue. The name "Rocky Linux" sounds too homebrew and unprofessional. CentOS sounds Enterprise-ish. I find it hard to believe any corporate client would take it seriously.
You can get far with bad branding. Case: Ubuntu
Ubuntu, a Bantu word, defines what it means to be truly human.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Debian offers around three years of support. Ubuntu LTS around five. Both pale in comparison with Red Hat and, by proxy, CentOS.
Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020. I would say a better reason is that while both are Linux distributions, they are distinct dialects and ecosystems. It isn't impossible to switch, but for institutions that have complex infrastructure built around the RHEL world, it is a lot of work to convert.
Consider an appliance that will be shipped to a literal cave for some mining operation. Do you want to build that on something that you would have to keep refreshing every year, so that every appliance you ship ends up running on a different foundation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020. That's mental.
My read on that is that you should be treating your servers as disposable and ephemeral as possible. Long uptimes mean configuration drift, general snowflakery, difficulties patching, patches getting delayed/not done, and so forth. Ideally you'd never upgrade your software in the usual way. You'd simply deploy the new version with automated tooling and tear down the older.
Do you have any idea how much effort it is to change everything over to "treating your servers as disposable"?! It's going to eat up a third (to half) of my "fun time" budget for the foreseeable future!
If you don’t like the name, launch your own CentOS replacement. There’s no better time than now. If there’s one thing this project does not need right now, it’s armchair marketing experts.
If you do care about a viable CentOS replacement, do something. Contribute code, money or expertise. The last thing any new and vulnerable project needs is another “idea guy” or a new logo.
Rocky makes me think ‘unstable’ and ‘uncertain’ which seems at odds with the stated vision of the distribution. Might make for a tough sell.
I got the same impression. Do you think it would be too late to change the name to "Rock Linux" or "Rock Solid Linux"? Since branding is so important this really seems like something that should go through focus groups or crowd sources somehow? Maybe a poll on hacker news? Unfortunately, I really think changing the name would be critical to the success of the project. Imagine you are a technical lead and you have to…
Also I feel naming it "Rock Solid Linux" would be a bit gaudy or arrogant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Thinking back to early CentOS days... My cofounder was Rocky McGaugh. He is no longer with us, so as a H/T to him, who never got to see the success that CentOS came to be, I introduce to you...Rocky Linux" — Gregory Kurtzer, Founder of Rocky Linux and Co-founder of CentOS It's written in Repo's README
No matter how good the intentions are, the name is pretty bad.
Great, another Linux distro... I am trying to use something , but I just can't. Spending my time fixing problems instead of doing actual work is fun, for a while. Every damn time I start this one laptop with Linux, trying to get away from Windows 10, there's something to fix. Oh, the undervolt is not being applied, time to build the whole thing again. Oh, restart causes it to wank the hard drive indefinitely for some…
It is less a standalone distro and more a free version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> Nouveau glitches.
Then why are you using it? As much work as people are putting into nouveau, they have to work more often than not against NVIDIA instead of with. If you want a system that works just use the proprietary driver.
> Why can't people just band together and create one good Linux distro for the desktop.
In this case? commercial interest, people used CentOS in production instead of buying Red Hat Enterprise. So the people in charge decided to make it useless for that. Now we have Rocky to do the same, just with people in charge that are not financially connected to Red Hat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020. I would say a better reason is that while both are Linux distributions, they are distinct dialects and ecosystems. It isn't impossible to switch, but for institutions that have complex infrastructure built around the RHEL world, it is a lot of work to convert.
> Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020 The main reason people choose Linux is due to its stability. It is totally ok to run servers in 2020. Also your statement seems the default cloud vendor lingo used to push people to adopt proprietary technology with high vendor lock-in.
Not everything can be highly ephemeral or a managed service, so running servers yourself is totally okay like you said.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020. I would say a better reason is that while both are Linux distributions, they are distinct dialects and ecosystems. It isn't impossible to switch, but for institutions that have complex infrastructure built around the RHEL world, it is a lot of work to convert.
> Arguably, no one should be running a server that long in 2020 The main reason people choose Linux is due to its stability. It is totally ok to run servers in 2020. Also your statement seems the default cloud vendor lingo used to push people to adopt proprietary technology with high vendor lock-in.
But I agree I also get the tone of "servers should be cattle and not pets, just kill them and build a new one". Which can also be done on bare metal if you're using vms/containers. It seems like most people forget these cloud servers need to run on bare metal.