On 11.12.2020 15:23, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 12/10/20 6:28 PM, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS wrote:
Allow me to disagree. We both trust Chris Wright's words, don't we? CTO won't lie. Citing him:
"To be exact, CentOS Stream is an upstream development platform for ecosystem developers. It will be updated several times a day.
So, like Fedora? People run servers on Fedora now, and I think that's fine.
On a production server, where no surprises are expected? That may be. People often act very, so to say, strangely.
I am telling about other people. I doubt those actively running Fedora on production systems do participate in these threads.
This is not a production operating system."
Does he say that CentOS is a production operating system?
As far as I know, Red Hat has never endorsed running CentOS in production, so I don't understand why it's significant that they also don't endorse running CentOS Stream in production.
Is RHEL itself suitable for running on production servers?
If not, my argument is weak. If yes, then CentOS, bug-to-bug compatible, is suitable, too.
RH won't ever endorse running CentOS (more generally, anything free of charge) for obvious reasons, so I don't care about their opinion on this subject.
And even if I reduce the number of CentOS Stream upgrades to minimal one, the base advantage of CentOS is lost: predictability.
It's really difficult for me to look at a distribution that just stops getting updates for 4-6 weeks, twice a year, and use the word "predictable" to describe it.
Well, it's not at all difficult for me. Tastes differ.
My first reaction to the announcement was pretty negative, too. But when I stepped back and looked at the current situation *real* honestly, I had to admit that CentOS just doesn't offer any of the things that people are complaining about losing.
And I hope that the CentOS maintainers don't interpret that as criticism, because it isn't intended to be. They've always maintained that if you need updates/patches in a timely manner, then you should be paying Red Hat for RHEL. I agreed with them then, and I still do.
My primary objection is breach of trust. RH shouldn't have lied at least to CentOS community.
Other bug-to-bug compatible RHEL clones will replace the CentOS, so this is the part I am less worried about. If someone is happy with CentOS Stream, that's fine. I am not, but that's (not only) my problem.