On Apr 4, 2005 10:14 PM, Dave Hornford OSD@hornfordassociates.com wrote:
Collins Richey wrote:
endeavors justify the decsion - ethics, community vs. vendor support, etc., etc. I've heard many comments to the effect that we CentOS users are just leaches, since RedHat does the major work. I would like to know how those of you who use CentOS in commercial
[ snips ]
I'm sorry if I am unable to follow the question of ethics here. At what point did Red Hat's efforts in the open source community become magical and change the ethical environment Red Hat lives in for people downstream of Red Hat? Your question pre-supposes that because CentOS is downstream of Red Hat then somehow it is different than Red Hat being downstream of the Linux kernel developers & others (fill in other names as you see fit). Red Hat is downstream of well over 99.99% of the 'major work'.
Red Hat has built a business around using freely available software.
Actually, as I stated earlier in this thread, my question about ethics pre-supposes and implies nothing of the sort. I asked the question because it was brought up by others. I agree with you 100%. Linux is a GPL product whether distributed by a for-hire vendor or a community maintainer.
I'm interested in every aspect of the CentOS project and its relationship to RedHat and its policies. I'm still hoping to convince my employer that CentOS would be a good choice for at least some of the servers and desktops I maintain. Most of these are still at the RH9 level. As a frugal person, I question what the company really gets much out of a maintenance contract other than expense, most especially so if you read the companion thread about experiences with paid support from RedHat.
Thanks for your insightful comments.