On 12/17/20 9:13 AM, Peter Eckel wrote:
Hi,
On 17. Dec 2020, at 09:03, Simon Matter simon.matter@invoca.ch wrote:
I know that Red Hat was and is free to decide what they want. But I can assure you that the only reason why quite a number RHEL subscriptions have been sold to the companies where I have worked in the past is that there was a project called CentOS!
if that is really the case (I think it could well be), the business decision of RedHat maybe makes perfect sense.
Some other distribution will step in for CentOS Linux. Rocky, Lenix, Springsdale, whatever. That distribution/s will take the role of CentOS in paving the path for RHEL without RedHat having to paying for it.
Sounds like a win/win-Situation, doesn't it?
No, it does not. Because so far Red hat was viewed as champion of Open Source and we "freeloaders" felt morally obligated to help Red Hat in any way we could. It was the right and honest thing to do.
Since Red Hat displayed greedy and stab-in-the-back attitude (buy hiding what wanted to do before they were ready), there is absolutely no moral obligation to help them in any way, and many now even have negative feelings towards another "greedy company".
Before this my message was "If you are going to spend the money on Linux, it is best to spend it on RHEL, they give so much to community it is only fair."
Since few days ago my message is "I do not like them anymore, and I do not have trust in them, so better stay clear from them."
CentOS project leaders had the same philosophy in mind when they refused to add extra packages to CentOS repositories like non-free codecs, 3rd party drivers (ElRepo had to be created separately) or even some desktop apps or KDE, MATE, etc. All of that was redirected to Red Hat controlled EPEL or 3rd party repositories.
But Rocky Linux and Lenix (CloudLinux) do not have to be constrained with these compliance, why should they when most likely Red Hat will do their best to complicate creation of other clones any way they can. You can say what ever you want, but I and others do not trust them/you to be better then their worst deed.
And there is no legal obligation to use RHEL and not clones in production, especially if CloudLinux develops a business model that will enhance FOSS clone and eventually spin off from RHEL into competitor just like Oracle did. Even Rocky Linux could be backed by some new company that will offer paid-for support in production.
Up until this backstabbing act any company that would try to steal support income from Red Hat would have been declared greedy by CentOS and even Linux community at large. Even today I do not like Oracle because they became direct competitor to Red Hat who was spending money on development, bugfixes, etc.
But since Red Hat is now in same category as Oracle, greedy corporation, EL/Linux community will WELCOME another player in paid-support for RHEL clones, and stand by them as long as their actions support needs of "us freeloaders". Do you really think CloudLinux decided to spend $1 million because they are altruists? I do not. They have seen Red Hat hang them selves (nobody provoked them) and saw unique one-in-a-lifetime opportunity to expand their portfolio from only light hosting clone based on RHEL source to all-purpose distro that will help them expand their paid-for support offer to baremetal servers and workstations, maybe even laptops. All they have to do is to publish binary clone and then expand on that ecosystem by adding repos like ElRepo, EPEL, CentOSPlus, and maybe non-free repo and they will be huge success and make bundle of money, well worth the investment they are making.
And you know what? I am going to support them, and bee happy for them. And direct any money spending THEIR WAY.