51–60 of 179 posts
https://openela.org
> It will provide an open process to access source code that organizations can use to build distributions compatible with RHEL So they're not trying to create something like RHEL but in a way that is committed to being more 'open' somehow. They're still shooting for the bug-for-bug stuff, and still an effort that's parasitic on RHEL in terms of its substantive development. This whole situation sucks.
I suppose this is both good and bad. I wonder if Red Hat/IBM anticipated this, and how they will respond to it.
Eh, it's good. IBM didn't want to continue supporting community things and so here we are, the RedHat business model was a bit tricky and increasingly so because of cloud computing. The great value of RedHat was supported software. You could buy one of those $10,000 per seat software packages for some engineering discipline that was guaranteed to work by RedHat and the vendor and if it wasn't they were quite motivate…
This is United Linux 21 years later. But this time, instead of building a distribution to compete with Red Hat, it's based on Red Hat (in practice, it is Red Hat). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Linux > "No subscriptions. No passwords. No barriers. Freeloaders welcome." I'm sure they're trying to be cheeky. But it also comes off as confirming Red Hat's position. OpenELA isn't about community, it's about having…
I wish they went for a 501(c)3 non-profit, rather than a 501(c)6 trade organization. The incentives between these two structures make a world of difference.
https://openela.org
> It will provide an open process to access source code that organizations can use to build distributions compatible with RHEL So they're not trying to create something like RHEL but in a way that is committed to being more 'open' somehow. They're still shooting for the bug-for-bug stuff, and still an effort that's parasitic on RHEL in terms of its substantive development. This whole situation sucks.
I like this solution way much better. Now the only player that's missing here is Almalinux. Maybe it's not too late to make a U-turn and join this new group so that Redhat alone can be responsible for contributing to RHEL as intended.
How is red hat being the only contributor a good thing?
This is United Linux 21 years later. But this time, instead of building a distribution to compete with Red Hat, it's based on Red Hat (in practice, it is Red Hat). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Linux > "No subscriptions. No passwords. No barriers. Freeloaders welcome." I'm sure they're trying to be cheeky. But it also comes off as confirming Red Hat's position. OpenELA isn't about community, it's about having…
I tend to respect the AlmaLinux way of doing things, but I respect where the others are coming from.
Based on https://openela.org/about/ this appears to be a source-only distribution. They do not speak of binary builds (just “buildable”), that's apparently up to the downstream participants.
If this is a commitment to a set of source then the players can compete on ease of use, support or other stuff.
I love how they throw Java into the trademarks section. Java isn't even mentioned anywhere. Looks like a case of Oracle being Oracle.