On Friday 03 June 2005 08:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I am a little touchy on this subject ... being that I hear it so often.
Yes, I understand that.
Using your logic, The only people who would get credit are the programmers who write the code for the parent projects. Or the Fedora Core volunteers who actually package and test probably 95% of the stuff that get into RHEL.
No. People should get credit in an amount proportionate to the amount of work they put in. If I'm evaluating a distro, I look at all the people who made the distro. And because I'm voting for a distro, I don't take into account the upstream programmers because their work goes into all the other distros so that's not a differentiating factor. So basically the people who made CentOS are: Red Hat and CentOS and Fedora volunteers. I don't know the percentage, but I'm fairly sure Red Hat gets most of the credit.
But the basic point is that CentOS is not a fork. It does not give added value over RHEL in the distro itself. It *is* RHEL, with a community and removed trademarks. So CentOS volunteers should get credit for the community and removing trademarks and Red Hat should get credit for everything else (ie. what we're voting for).
So no, I don't think that you should vote for RHEL in a place where CentOS is also listed ... any more than I think you should vote for Debian if you use Ubuntu.
Ubuntu is a fork of Debian with added value, not a rebranding.
That is, of course, only my opinion. You have yours. We are both entitled to our own. Neither is right or wrong.
Sure, this is only friendly discussion.