RedHat becomes more and more "sympathetic"

Feature
,
1

CentOS Stream will now be the sole repository for public RHEL-related source code releases.

2
3
4

both should be affected if they no longer have access to the sources.

5

I am not sure it is so easy that people would it be, rhel uses free software, they do not make it themself, they have to redistribute the source of software they have used.

They know it for sure

you have lawyers ready to make money, trust me :smiley:

6

grabs popcorn…

1 Like
7

It really seems like RedHat are doing their damnedest to convince people to not use RH-based distros. I’m not sure what good they think that’s going to do them…

2 Likes
8

maybe it is a good point to drop rhel-like in NS8 and go to debian ?

5 Likes
9

If I were starting today and wanted an EL-based distro, it would probably be Oracle Linux, though the NS8 installer doesn’t work there. Oracle has its own history to be sure, and there’s plenty about it that’s bad–but they also have plenty of resources and motive to make their distro work, which is something I’m not quite confident in for Alma or Rocky. But otherwise, Debian is looking more and more attractive. I recall Bullseye having some problems with NS8, but Bookworm is out now and I understood should have more current versions of the relevant software.

2 Likes
10

bookworm works well for what I saw

it is just a condition you could comment if you want to install on oracle linux

1 Like
11

How about Fedora? Would that be a viable RHEL-like alternative?

Far as I can tell, it’s unaffected by the RHEL change. Happy to be proven wrong though.

1 Like
12

What would this do to e.g. scientific Linux (CERN) https://scientificlinux.org/ ?

13

Ultimately, we do not find value in a RHEL rebuild and we are not under any obligation to make things easier for rebuilders; this is our call to make.

2 Likes
14

We finally express our sadness that this long road has led the FOSS community to such a disappointing place.

1 Like
15

Ultimately, we do not find value in a RHEL rebuild and we are not under any obligation to make things easier for rebuilders; this is our call to make.

Simply rebuilding code, without adding value or changing it in any way, represents a real threat to open source companies everywhere.

I don’t think it can be any clearer: this is a directed attempted to kill Rocky/Alma/etc. Not surprising at this point, but sad.

2 Likes
16

Agree, so let’s focus on NS8 and Debian. Due to past experiences with bold moves and breaking promises from RH and IBM, case closed I would say.

  1. No stability
  2. No Roadmap, no future
  3. No good understanding of GPL. Nowhere does it say I need to add anything before I am entitled to use it any way I want.
  4. Broken promises
  5. Absolutely unreliable, the very opposite of what it was known for. In a record breaking timeframe

Goodbye good old RedHat, it was fun whilst it lasted. Hi Debian!

5 Likes
17

Hi @LayLow

In a flash, those two quotes make me say the same thing: Hi Debian !

It reminds me of Novell with 60% of the market suddenly disappearing into darkness in just a very but very few years if not months…

Caussidière for Danton: “The first time History repeats itself as tragedy, the second time as farce.”

Michel-André

1 Like
18

There is something good in everything bad:
The distribution-agnostic approach of Nethserver 8 can be abandoned, which will simplify maintenance and allow the freed resources to focus on improving Debian support and other funny things.

19

i have been following this story closely, and generally, while i would like to go with the community on this one, i think we also need to take a look at the tremendous effort and contributions that redhat has made to the opensource community, there is a numbe rof linux distros that are supported by redhat, and redhat has released significant numbe rof patches to linux, maintaining and building a linux distro is by no means easy or cheap, develoeprs are expensive and redhat is only trying to survive.

their actions are mainly towards oracle and amazon os, which are based on rhel, and these charge their own support for the os that they provide, which does not tickle down to redhat, while still being compatible.

if oracle sells more support license for oracle linux, because they are cheaper, and redhat is unable to support its os due to financial issues, who’s to blame.

the revenues of redhat in 2023 are down compared to previous years, and this i think could be due to freeloaders, opensource projects need a wat to geenrate revenue and income as well, so some actions could be ok.

i recently heard that they ar enow allowing 240 free installations of RHEL, now unless you are a large organization, 240 active installation licenses i think is also great.

Overall, i also think redhat missed the point, the reason they have the many customers they have had, and the many packages and software built for RHEL is because of centos, it was the stepping stone for most users.

20

suppose this is the case brother,
a number of enterpise use RHEL due to os level support.

this now becomes a question to dev team at nethesis, with an installation of nethserver 8, with an active support, how much of that support covers os level shit. is the support full featured. just curious thats all.

interesting, i sa alma linux offer a dashboard to manage multiple alma installations, kinda similar to cloudlinux os