CentOS 8 is a case of too little too late for me. There were so many cobwebs growing on CentOS 7, and no clear timeline ever being given on when (or if !) CentOS8 might ever arrive that we gradually shifted elsewhere.
CentOS Stream
41–50 of 54 posts
Re: CentOS Stream
#42> – The new CentOS Stream is a rolling-release distro that tracks just ahead of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) development
So if someone wanted a free RHEL through CentOS, now CentOS is no longer a free RHEL.CentOS is now RHEL-devel.
Re: CentOS Stream
#43> – The new CentOS Stream is a rolling-release distro that tracks just ahead of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) development So if someone wanted a free RHEL through CentOS, now CentOS is no longer a free RHEL.CentOS is now RHEL-devel.
CentOS is still the same CentOS. CentOS Stream is "RHEL-devel".
Re: CentOS Stream
#44So a modern RHEL but more stable than say bleeding edge fedora? Interesting
Re: CentOS Stream
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oracle Java is practically identical to OpenJDK Java too. I'm not sure if its branding or legal, but the big companies like it that way.
OpenJDK is based on Oracle Java. CentOS on the other hand is based on RHEL. That would be like OpenJDK being based on Oracle Java.
> That would be like OpenJDK being based on Oracle Java.
This days it's the opposite, Oracle is "selling" a forked version of their own product.
Re: CentOS Stream
#46>The CentOS Stream project sits between the Fedora Project and RHEL in the RHEL Development process, providing a "rolling preview" of future RHEL kernels and features. Thats what Fedora was originally for. Fedora advancements were mainlined into RHEL, and RHEL was repackaged as Centos. If i had to propose a theory...At worst, this is "embrace, extend, extinguish." Tacking on a vainglorious service for an already succ…
>Centos cant directly relate their brand to RedHat, but Redhat gets to call their offering "Centos Stream" when Centos is itself a trademark? Its very suspicious.
Sus? Sure. Illegal? Not possible. IBM holds all the trademarks here. They draw the lines where they please.
Re: CentOS Stream
#47>The CentOS Stream project sits between the Fedora Project and RHEL in the RHEL Development process, providing a "rolling preview" of future RHEL kernels and features. Thats what Fedora was originally for. Fedora advancements were mainlined into RHEL, and RHEL was repackaged as Centos. If i had to propose a theory...At worst, this is "embrace, extend, extinguish." Tacking on a vainglorious service for an already succ…
[deleted]
Re: CentOS Stream
#48Wow, a CentOS with a rolling release model. Super cool! I really hope this makes CentOS a bit more competitive with Ubuntu for the hobbiest/project space. Seems like raspbian/debian/ubuntu could use some competition in the space.
You’re thinking more along the lines of Fedora, this probably tracks what Red Hat is aiming for in their regular point releases for RHEL.
Re: CentOS Stream
#49>CentOS Stream is parallel to existing CentOS builds So why does regular CenOS exist in this day and age given its semi-official status under the RH umbrella ? Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ? Isn't it a massive waste of everyone's resources to rebuild everything and remove the trademarks? This seems like a more interesting future for CentOS to have as something different from baseline RHEL.
> Why doesn't RH just let people use RHEL without support ?
They do: it's called CentOS. CentOS was acquired by RedHat in 2014, keeping an independent governance body. But the reason RedHat didn't release itself as open source was Oracle. They were rebuilding RHEL and reselling it, so RedHat closed up its process and did the bare minimum required to comply with the GPL. Brian Stevens confirmed it. So now RedHat exists in order to make money off a supported product [and fend off competitors [and enforce trademarks]], and CentOS exists to keep control over the open-source spin-off of the same. So if you want the real deal certified supported enterprise distro, you have to pay for it, and if you want an uncertified slightly-not-the-same open-source alternative, that's free.
Re: CentOS Stream
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are misinterpreting what I said. I'm not talking about someone else impersonating RHEL. Canonical has no issue with its OS out in the market. RHEL could just be free to use (with updates but without other support) if they choose. This is how it used to be before it became RHEL anyway. Hence, CentOS was created as an outsider effort. Nowadays, CentOS is half inside RH, which is why the distinction is a bit silly.…
"RHEL could just be free to use (with updates but without other support) if they choose." But not with that name. Centos is as close as it can get.
Red Hat bought out CentOS now. They own CentOS. There would be no trademark dillution from a legal standpoint if they used their own trademark for their free version of the distro.