On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 12:08, Alessandro Baggi alessandro.baggi@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Johnny, thank you for your answer. I always accepted release cycle of CentOS without any problem (maybe with EL8 but it is ok).
I don't need SLA and I don't blame anyone for this, errors can occour. For example in this story, I applied blindly updates without check what and how so really I ran the command that brake my installation...and as I said no problem for this.
You said:" We TRY to validate all fixes, but if something is broken in the source code, it will likely be borken in CentOS Linux as well". This means that if a rhel package break something, the centos team releases it with the bug anyway also if the bug is already known? The update cannot be delayed until the correct version is released if the package bug is already known? Is it not possible by policy or other? Validate is equal to "test if nothing get breakage"?
For CentOS-4, CentOS-5 and CentOS-6, the motto was "Bug for bug compatible with RHEL." If things failed for RHEL, they would fail in the same way for CentOS as much as possible. Many users of CentOS were exceedingly proud of it and expected it to be the case for when they needed justifications and such. The problem is that no one likes it when a major problem comes out from RHEL. THis happens probably once every 3 to 5 years and then everyone starts wanting to know why CentOS doesn't ship things when people find something wrong. People usually get motivated and start testing things more.. but after about 6 months of no other problems.. can justify that bugs aren't common so why do it.
On a side note, you keep emphasizing you aren't expecting an SLA.. but all your questions are what someone asks to have in a defined SLA. I have done the same thing in the past when things have gone badly, but couching it in 'I am not asking' just makes the people being asked grumpy. Better to be open and say 'Look I would like to know what my expectations should be for CentOS' and be done with it.