Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

lists.centos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 642 posts

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#491

Post by beervirus »

centimeter wrote: post #257
em500 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does this mean that CentOS 8 is EOL come 2021? They've just eradicated almost all mentions of CentOS 8 from their main website. So: yes. > What about everybody who built their product on the assumption that there would be a stable CentOS until then? They just got what they paid for?

> They just got what they paid for? Funny, but isn't this totally reasonable grounds for an adverse possession claim against RHEL? If a business claims they're going to keep doing something, and you build your business on that claim, and then they change their mind, you can have grounds to sue. Or, at least, that's what I vaguely remember from reading about AP law.

That is not at all what adverse possession is.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#492

Post by dragonwriter »

centimeter wrote: post #257
em500 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does this mean that CentOS 8 is EOL come 2021? They've just eradicated almost all mentions of CentOS 8 from their main website. So: yes. > What about everybody who built their product on the assumption that there would be a stable CentOS until then? They just got what they paid for?

> They just got what they paid for? Funny, but isn't this totally reasonable grounds for an adverse possession claim against RHEL? If a business claims they're going to keep doing something, and you build your business on that claim, and then they change their mind, you can have grounds to sue. Or, at least, that's what I vaguely remember from reading about AP law.

That's not adverse possession. I think you are referring to promissory estoppel: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/promissory_estoppel#

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#493

Post by kbenson »

bonzini wrote: post #435
kbenson wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> it's a change that has strictly technical motives. I understand the business reasons for doing so. I don't agree with anyone branding this as done for purely technical reasons. Having CentOS Stream may be needed for technical reasons. Stopping CentOS 8 is in no way a technical decision. They are unrelated in any technical sense. If Red Hat just doesn't want to put resources towards CentOS as it traditionally exis…

The thing is, Red Hat never considered the distro more than a side effect of providing a base for developing "things" that will run on RHEL. It's even written on the centos.org home page, the distro is not why CentOS existed in 2020. So the fact that users (including myself!!) enjoyed a free distro as a result was not a part of Red Hat's RHEL strategy in any way.

That only makes sense if Red Hat started CentOS. They didn't. The fact that they took control of it then changed it, even the web page, and then are not effectively killed the reason people are using it, is the thing I'm upset about.

If I effectively took control of the EFF and then a couple years later changed the website copy to say that the EFF is a vehicle for litigating cases that kbenson thinks are important, and then actually changed its actions to do so, would you argue the same points? How is this any different? Something that was a net good for many people has been taken over and eventually killed. I think we're all worse off for that.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#494

Post by bubblethink »

jmnicolas wrote: post #224
kcb wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree I think RHEL and CentOS go/went hand in hand. With RHEL being used and licensed depending on the project or the environment. Binary compatibility and the uniformity of managing both being the big selling point. Now the closest alternative is Canonical with Ubuntu Server which can be installed wherever with no strings and support purchased as required.

Yeah but how long before Canonical pull the same move as RedHat? The way i see it, Canonical is trying to build a moat (lastly with Snap). I think I'm going back to Debian for my servers. i wish they add 10 years lts though.

>i wish they add 10 years lts though

I really don't get this fascination with 10 year LTS. Why is it so hard to upgrade in half a decade ? I mean this is such an arbitrary number. If RHEL started offering 50 year support, people will complain that Debian is 1/10th of RHEL.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#496

Post by zamalek »

awill wrote: post #109

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…

> For my server I want a boring, stable OS, so I'm definitely not using Streams.

Have you considered Ubuntu Server? "Being boring" and "having no vision" are frequent critiques of Ubuntu, which(as we probably all know) can be the highest possible compliment in some scenarios, like servers. They also have pretty decent LTS.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#497

Post by abalashov »

someperson wrote: post #466
abalashov wrote: post #327

When I got started in business in the late 2000s, I was constantly fighting for Debian vs. CentOS, and eventually was forced to concede -- 95% of my customers wanted to run CentOS, all the more so given the exceptional conservatism of the telecom industry. They were attracted to its promise of long-term support and longevity, and, perhaps more vitally, it's what all the other organisations who sought an "enterprise-f…

Why don't the telecoms just pay for RHEL? The December 31 2021 deadline is brutal for high-reliability infrastructure, but it principle the migration path is super simple, right?

Some of them do. I've mainly got smaller companies and startup-type companies in mind.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#498

Post by mulmen »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #382
davoneus wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

never, Ever, EVER trust Oracle. Especially with something as important as an open source product. Evidence: Oracle's Sen. VP Glueck statement that "There is no math that can justify open source from a cost perspective." No chance you'll ever see me running OEL.

> never, Ever, EVER trust Oracle. Been burned by them before. Not at liberty to give details, but the outcome is that I never choose Oracle for anything for the rest of my career. Even if it would save time and money.

The fact that you aren't comfortable discussing the details of how you were screwed by Oracle, even anonymously on the internet, is really all anyone needs to know about Oracle.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#499

Post by shiftpgdn »

mattdm wrote: post #425
bayindirh wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a silent but relatively big user base of CentOS in HPC and scientific computing. ScientificLinux and CentOS rules all HPC clusters. Clusters are like enterprise servers. Big, monolithic, rarely upgraded. They're upgraded in one big-fell swoop and left to run. There'll be another clone of RHEL since HPC can't accept CentOS Stream as the alternative. The whole infra is too big to move to Debian too. So with tod…

Okay, this is a serious question. For me, not an official RH position. In my time in HPC, nodes were baked with a specific image and then that basically never ever got updates. As I came to that as a sysadmin from other areas, I found that somewhat horrifying, but it seemed pretty universal. Have things changed such that applying patches regularly (like, more often than once a month or so except in emergencies) is a…

I think that's because HPC users are largely non-technical developers. We changed a DHCP schema at one point and had a bunch of angry academics in the IT office because their Matlab scripts were broken. Many of them had been hard coding IP addresses into the code itself.

Re: CentOS Project shifts focus to CentOS Stream

#500

Post by acomjean »

centimeter wrote: post #257
em500 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does this mean that CentOS 8 is EOL come 2021? They've just eradicated almost all mentions of CentOS 8 from their main website. So: yes. > What about everybody who built their product on the assumption that there would be a stable CentOS until then? They just got what they paid for?

> They just got what they paid for? Funny, but isn't this totally reasonable grounds for an adverse possession claim against RHEL? If a business claims they're going to keep doing something, and you build your business on that claim, and then they change their mind, you can have grounds to sue. Or, at least, that's what I vaguely remember from reading about AP law.

I think the problem is that it’s not like red hat has a contractual obligation with other businesses since Centos is essentially “free” and likely there isnt an agreement.
Post reply on HN