On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:44:36PM -0600, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS wrote:
CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on my production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks think about this?
Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat) entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos.
I definitely appreciate the vote of confidence in Fedora! You're not alone in using Fedora in a lot of serious ways.
However, I really encourage everyone to give this a chance. This is (post-Fedora) RHEL development opening up in a new way, and CentOS is central to it. That's a good place to be!
Am 08.12.20 um 23:22 schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:44:36PM -0600, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS wrote:
CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on my production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks think about this?
Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat) entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos.
I definitely appreciate the vote of confidence in Fedora! You're not alone in using Fedora in a lot of serious ways.
However, I really encourage everyone to give this a chance. This is (post-Fedora) RHEL development opening up in a new way, and CentOS is central to it. That's a good place to be!
Its important to distinguish two aspects here in this whole discussion.
Its great that RH opens their "firewalls". CentOS Stream is great for that but what actually pissed the people off is the termination of CentOS8 Linux. So all arguments for C8S doesn't touch the problem that people have now. And no - C8S is not a valid substitution. Its valid for a different usage scenario that is of course worth to get a chance but the mentioned problem don't get addressed ...
__ Leon
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 8:30 PM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel < centos-devel@centos.org> wrote:
Am 08.12.20 um 23:22 schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:44:36PM -0600, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via
CentOS wrote:
CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on
my
production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks think about this?
Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat) entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos.
I definitely appreciate the vote of confidence in Fedora! You're not
alone
in using Fedora in a lot of serious ways.
However, I really encourage everyone to give this a chance. This is (post-Fedora) RHEL development opening up in a new way, and CentOS is central to it. That's a good place to be!
Its important to distinguish two aspects here in this whole discussion.
Its great that RH opens their "firewalls". CentOS Stream is great for that but what actually pissed the people off is the termination of CentOS8 Linux. So all arguments for C8S doesn't touch the problem that people have now. And no - C8S is not a valid substitution. Its valid for a different usage scenario that is of course worth to get a chance but the mentioned problem don't get addressed ...
__ Leon
Specifically, terminating CentOS 8 Linux after vowing to support it until May of 2029.
If they had announced this plan from the start, or if they reverse course and announce it as of the start of CentOS 9, I'd be OK with it.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 7:30 PM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel < centos-devel@centos.org> wrote:
Am 08.12.20 um 23:22 schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:44:36PM -0600, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via
CentOS wrote:
CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on
my
production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks think about this?
Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat) entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos.
I definitely appreciate the vote of confidence in Fedora! You're not
alone
in using Fedora in a lot of serious ways.
However, I really encourage everyone to give this a chance. This is (post-Fedora) RHEL development opening up in a new way, and CentOS is central to it. That's a good place to be!
Its important to distinguish two aspects here in this whole discussion.
Its great that RH opens their "firewalls". CentOS Stream is great for that but what actually pissed the people off is the termination of CentOS8 Linux. So all arguments for C8S doesn't touch the problem that people have now. And no - C8S is not a valid substitution. Its valid for a different usage scenario that is of course worth to get a chance but the mentioned problem don't get addressed ...
I agree the timing of this isn't great but keep in mind the vast majority of CentOS users are on CentOS Linux 7, they have the full lifecycle they expected.
The relatively fewer that are on CentOS Linux 8 have some decisions to make. The end of 2021 is sooner than they were expecting *but* there is a fully available upgrade path from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS Stream 8 (IE: not a reinstall), and that will take them to 2024. That's half of the 10 years they might have expected, but it should let them give Stream a try and see if it is for them or not.
-Mike
__ Leon _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Am 09.12.20 um 04:18 schrieb Mike McGrath:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 7:30 PM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel <centos-devel@centos.org mailto:centos-devel@centos.org> wrote:
Am 08.12.20 um 23:22 schrieb Matthew Miller: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:44:36PM -0600, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS wrote: >>> CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on my >>> production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks think >>> about this? >> Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat) >> entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos. > > I definitely appreciate the vote of confidence in Fedora! You're not alone > in using Fedora in a lot of serious ways. > > However, I really encourage everyone to give this a chance. This is > (post-Fedora) RHEL development opening up in a new way, and CentOS is > central to it. That's a good place to be! > > Its important to distinguish two aspects here in this whole discussion. Its great that RH opens their "firewalls". CentOS Stream is great for that but what actually pissed the people off is the termination of CentOS8 Linux. So all arguments for C8S doesn't touch the problem that people have now. And no - C8S is not a valid substitution. Its valid for a different usage scenario that is of course worth to get a chance but the mentioned problem don't get addressed ...I agree the timing of this isn't great but keep in mind the vast majority of CentOS users are on CentOS Linux 7, they have the full lifecycle they expected.
The relatively fewer that are on CentOS Linux 8 have some decisions to make. The end of 2021 is sooner than they were expecting *but* there is a fully available upgrade path from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS Stream 8 (IE: not a reinstall), and that will take them to 2024. That's half of the 10 years they might have expected, but it should let them give Stream a try and see if it is for them or not.
If "Stream" is the base for the next RHEL8.x where are the updates until 2029 coming from, when CentOS Stream 8 will be shutdown at 2024?
-- Leon
On 12/9/20 5:23 AM, Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel wrote:
Am 09.12.20 um 04:18 schrieb Mike McGrath:
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 7:30 PM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel <centos-devel@centos.org mailto:centos-devel@centos.org> wrote:
Am 08.12.20 um 23:22 schrieb Matthew Miller: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 12:44:36PM -0600, Robert G. (Doc) Savage via CentOS wrote: >>> CentOS 8's future is not looking bright. Recently deployed CentOS8 on my >>> production workload and now hearing this. What do other folks think >>> about this? >> Speaking only for myself, I am ready to give up on CentOS (and Red Hat) >> entirely. Fedora meets all my clients' needs with none of the chaos. > > I definitely appreciate the vote of confidence in Fedora! You're not alone > in using Fedora in a lot of serious ways. > > However, I really encourage everyone to give this a chance. This is > (post-Fedora) RHEL development opening up in a new way, and CentOS is > central to it. That's a good place to be! > >
Its important to distinguish two aspects here in this whole discussion.
Its great that RH opens their "firewalls". CentOS Stream is great for that but what actually pissed the people off is the termination of CentOS8 Linux. So all arguments for C8S doesn't touch the problem that people have now. And no - C8S is not a valid substitution. Its valid for a different usage scenario that is of course worth to get a chance but the mentioned problem don't get addressed ...
I agree the timing of this isn't great but keep in mind the vast majority of CentOS users are on CentOS Linux 7, they have the full lifecycle they expected.
The relatively fewer that are on CentOS Linux 8 have some decisions to make. The end of 2021 is sooner than they were expecting *but* there is a fully available upgrade path from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS Stream 8 (IE: not a reinstall), and that will take them to 2024. That's half of the 10 years they might have expected, but it should let them give Stream a try and see if it is for them or not.
If "Stream" is the base for the next RHEL8.x where are the updates until 2029 coming from, when CentOS Stream 8 will be shutdown at 2024?
The lifetime will be only for the Full Support period. Stream will live for 5 years, not 10. However, the source code will still be available for you to build it yourself.
I believe, for Stream and not for Linux, that the possibility of a SIG to continue building the source code could exist if the community steps up and provides people in a Special Interest Group. If there is no community volunteers, then this will not happen. Again .. this would be for Stream and in the 2024 time frame.
We have SIGs now .. very few of them are non-Red Hat .. the Xen part of the Virt SIG being one example of a non-Red Hat one that does exist.
So:
1) After the full process for Stream 8 is in place and RHEL Engineers are actually directly doing the code commits into the CentOS Stream git branches .. should be some time the 1st QTR 2021.
2) As we get closer to the end of the full support phase of RHEL 8 (May 7, 2019 + 5 years .. so likely May 31, 2024) we need a SIG to ask to form who would take over building the source code.
So far, we have had very few members of the community actually become part of SIGs. I have no idea if anyone will volunteer to do it. Red Hat has said they will stop funding it at the end of the full support phase.
Any details would need to be worked out based on the number of people in the SIG, if one exists, to keep doing the stream builds. What that process is exactly and where the builds would live would all need to be worked out.
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
I believe, for Stream and not for Linux, that the possibility of a SIG to continue building the source code could exist if the community steps up and provides people in a Special Interest Group. If there is no community volunteers, then this will not happen. Again .. this would be for Stream and in the 2024 time frame.
We have SIGs now .. very few of them are non-Red Hat .. the Xen part of the Virt SIG being one example of a non-Red Hat one that does exist.
So:
- After the full process for Stream 8 is in place and RHEL Engineers
are actually directly doing the code commits into the CentOS Stream git branches .. should be some time the 1st QTR 2021.
- As we get closer to the end of the full support phase of RHEL 8
(May 7, 2019 + 5 years .. so likely May 31, 2024) we need a SIG to ask to form who would take over building the source code.
So far, we have had very few members of the community actually become part of SIGs. I have no idea if anyone will volunteer to do it. Red Hat has said they will stop funding it at the end of the full support phase.
Any details would need to be worked out based on the number of people in the SIG, if one exists, to keep doing the stream builds. What that process is exactly and where the builds would live would all need to be worked out.
Thanks for the response BUT it seem to conflict with the answers to questions #13 and #14 on the FAQ (https://centos.org/distro-faq/). Or perhaps the FAQ is in error? In case that gets updated or changed, I'll quote it here to show what it was at the time of writing:
- - - - Q13: Can I start up a SIG that will maintain CentOS Stream 8 after RHEL8 reaches the end of Full Support?
A: We will not be putting hardware, resources, or asking volunteers to work towards that effort, nor will we allow the CentOS brand to be used for such a project. Once RHEL8 reaches the end of full support, CentOS Stream 8 will be retired from build servers, community build systems, primary mirror sites (copies will remain on vault.centos.org), and other places within our ecosystem. Having SIGs build against multiple streams, and packaging/distributing multiple streams, once they are no longer active, is a distraction from what we want to be our main focus - the active stream that precedes the next RHEL release.
Q14: Can the CentOS community continue to develop/rebuild CentOS linux?
A: We will not be putting hardware, resources, or asking for volunteers to work towards that effort, nor will we allow the CentOS brand to be used for such a project, as we feel that it dilutes what we are trying to do with the refocus on CentOS Stream. That said, the code is open source and we wouldn’t try to stop anyone from choosing to use it or build their own packages from the code. - - - -
TYL,
On 09 Dec 08:40, Scott Dowdle wrote:
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
I believe, for Stream and not for Linux, that the possibility of a SIG to continue building the source code could exist if the community steps up and provides people in a Special Interest Group. If there is no community volunteers, then this will not happen. Again .. this would be for Stream and in the 2024 time frame.
We have SIGs now .. very few of them are non-Red Hat .. the Xen part of the Virt SIG being one example of a non-Red Hat one that does exist.
So:
- After the full process for Stream 8 is in place and RHEL Engineers
are actually directly doing the code commits into the CentOS Stream git branches .. should be some time the 1st QTR 2021.
- As we get closer to the end of the full support phase of RHEL 8
(May 7, 2019 + 5 years .. so likely May 31, 2024) we need a SIG to ask to form who would take over building the source code.
So far, we have had very few members of the community actually become part of SIGs. I have no idea if anyone will volunteer to do it. Red Hat has said they will stop funding it at the end of the full support phase.
Any details would need to be worked out based on the number of people in the SIG, if one exists, to keep doing the stream builds. What that process is exactly and where the builds would live would all need to be worked out.
Thanks for the response BUT it seem to conflict with the answers to questions #13 and #14 on the FAQ (https://centos.org/distro-faq/). Or perhaps the FAQ is in error? In case that gets updated or changed, I'll quote it here to show what it was at the time of writing:
Q13: Can I start up a SIG that will maintain CentOS Stream 8 after RHEL8 reaches the end of Full Support?
A: We will not be putting hardware, resources, or asking volunteers to work towards that effort, nor will we allow the CentOS brand to be used for such a project. Once RHEL8 reaches the end of full support, CentOS Stream 8 will be retired from build servers, community build systems, primary mirror sites (copies will remain on vault.centos.org), and other places within our ecosystem. Having SIGs build against multiple streams, and packaging/distributing multiple streams, once they are no longer active, is a distraction from what we want to be our main focus - the active stream that precedes the next RHEL release.
Q13 is against the statement that stream is ahead of RHEL, if RHEL is built on top of stream, there must be a stream to do the last 5 years of RHEL8.
Q14: Can the CentOS community continue to develop/rebuild CentOS linux?
A: We will not be putting hardware, resources, or asking for volunteers to work towards that effort, nor will we allow the CentOS brand to be used for such a project, as we feel that it dilutes what we are trying to do with the refocus on CentOS Stream. That said, the code is open source and we wouldn’t try to stop anyone from choosing to use it or build their own packages from the code.
TYL,
Scott Dowdle 704 Church Street Belgrade, MT 59714 (406)388-0827 [home] (406)994-3931 [work] _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
Q13 is against the statement that stream is ahead of RHEL, if RHEL is built on top of stream, there must be a stream to do the last 5 years of RHEL8.
While, for some reason, you draw that conclusion, they have clearly stated that is not the case. The last 5 years gets no package rebasing nor new feature as it shifts from Full Support mode to Maintenance mode. In Maintenance mode they may do some hardware enablement as necessary but the bulk is just applying security and critical bug fixes. Stream is for only for the Full Support phase where new features are being added.
They will already be testing updates before adding them to Stream so they'll continue to do that before adding them to RHEL in Maintenance mode.
TYL,
Scott Dowdle>
Q13 is against the statement that stream is ahead of RHEL, if RHEL is built on top of stream, there must be a stream to do the last 5 years of RHEL8.
While, for some reason, you draw that conclusion, they have clearly stated that is not the case. The last 5 years gets no package rebasing nor new feature as it shifts from Full Support mode to Maintenance mode. In Maintenance mode they may do some hardware enablement as necessary but the bulk is just applying security and critical bug fixes. Stream is for only for the Full Support phase where new features are being added.
That hasn't always been the case with previous EL versions - e.g. Firefox with EL6 went from ESR 68 to ESR 78 only 10 weeks ago - which was just before EL6 reached Maintenance EOL ...
James Pearson
On 12/9/20 6:42 PM, James Pearson wrote:
Scott Dowdle>
Q13 is against the statement that stream is ahead of RHEL, if RHEL is built on top of stream, there must be a stream to do the last 5 years of RHEL8.
While, for some reason, you draw that conclusion, they have clearly stated that is not the case. The last 5 years gets no package rebasing nor new feature as it shifts from Full Support mode to Maintenance mode. In Maintenance mode they may do some hardware enablement as necessary but the bulk is just applying security and critical bug fixes. Stream is for only for the Full Support phase where new features are being added.
That hasn't always been the case with previous EL versions - e.g. Firefox with EL6 went from ESR 68 to ESR 78 only 10 weeks ago - which was just before EL6 reached Maintenance EOL ...
James Pearson
And the high-quality QA killed sound in the process https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=17767
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
That hasn't always been the case with previous EL versions - e.g. Firefox with EL6 went from ESR 68 to ESR 78 only 10 weeks ago - which was just before EL6 reached Maintenance EOL ...
And the high-quality QA killed sound in the process https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=17767
There have always been exceptions, especially with desktop applications... and in situations where upstream has long dropped support... and backporting security and critical bug fixes to such an old version has become so much work that rebasing is significantly easier.
Also, to address the "but there's still a bug" follow-up... yeah, bugs happen. Given the thousands of packages and all of them being imperfect, every distro out there has thousands of bug reports... including RHEL. One can only hope that updates always solve more problems than they create... for the majority of people.
Let's hope less people use this announcement as a platform to bring up every grievance they have / have ever had. That isn't productive at all.
TYL,
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
If "Stream" is the base for the next RHEL8.x where are the updates until 2029 coming from, when CentOS Stream 8 will be shutdown at 2024?
If you look at this chart (https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#RHEL8_Planning_Guid...) you'll see that in 2024, RHEL 8.10 should be released... and at that point RHEL 8 would hit 5 years old and switch from "Full Suport" mode into "Maintenance Support" mode which lasts for another 5 years. Once RHEL goes into "Maintenance Mode", it doesn't need an upstream for new developments because there won't be any. What will happen to stream? One would presume that between now and 2024, RHEL 9 would be released... and a CentOS 9 Stream would in operation.
TYL,
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:14 AM Scott Dowdle dowdle@montanalinux.org wrote:
Greetings,
----- Original Message -----
If "Stream" is the base for the next RHEL8.x where are the updates until 2029 coming from, when CentOS Stream 8 will be shutdown at 2024?
If you look at this chart ( https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#RHEL8_Planning_Guid...) you'll see that in 2024, RHEL 8.10 should be released... and at that point RHEL 8 would hit 5 years old and switch from "Full Suport" mode into "Maintenance Support" mode which lasts for another 5 years. Once RHEL goes into "Maintenance Mode", it doesn't need an upstream for new developments because there won't be any. What will happen to stream? One would presume that between now and 2024, RHEL 9 would be released... and a CentOS 9 Stream would in operation.
Yup, I can confirm that. We plan on releasing RHEL about every 3 years. With a 5 year cycle, that would mean about 2 years of overlap between CentOS Stream 8 and CentOS Stream 9. I'm expecting a CentOS Stream 9 soon as we've already started to bootstrap 9 in Fedora's ELN.
-Mike
TYL,
Scott Dowdle 704 Church Street Belgrade, MT 59714 (406)388-0827 [home] (406)994-3931 [work] _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 21:18 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
I agree the timing of this isn't great but keep in mind the vast majority of CentOS users are on CentOS Linux 7, they have the full lifecycle they expected.
During the last year I updated several of my personal C6 Server to C8 according to this promise: https://web.archive.org/web/20201020102328/https://wiki.centos.org/About/Pro...
The relatively fewer that are on CentOS Linux 8 have some decisions to make. The end of 2021 is sooner than they were expecting *but* there is a fully available upgrade path from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS Stream 8 (IE: not a reinstall), and that will take them to 2024. That's half of the 10 years they might have expected, but it should let them give Stream a try and see if it is for them or not.
I would recommend a distupgradable distribution not using rpm.
regards, Oliver
What do you think about Rocky Linux? https://news.itsfoss.com/rocky-linux-announcement/
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:24 PM Oliver Paukstadt pstadt@sourcentral.org wrote:
On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 21:18 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
I agree the timing of this isn't great but keep in mind the vast majority of CentOS users are on CentOS Linux 7, they have the full lifecycle they expected.
During the last year I updated several of my personal C6 Server to C8 according to this promise: https://web.archive.org/web/20201020102328/https://wiki.centos.org/About/Pro...
The relatively fewer that are on CentOS Linux 8 have some decisions to make. The end of 2021 is sooner than they were expecting *but* there is a fully available upgrade path from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS Stream 8 (IE: not a reinstall), and that will take them to 2024. That's half of the 10 years they might have expected, but it should let them give Stream a try and see if it is for them or not.
I would recommend a distupgradable distribution not using rpm.
regards, Oliver
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
James Pearson -
Johnny Hughes -
Julien Pivotto -
Leon Fauster -
Manuel Wolfshant -
Matthew Miller -
Mike McGrath -
Oliver Paukstadt -
Phelps, Matthew -
Satish Patel -
Scott Dowdle