Hello list.
I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in my opinion very good idea. What do you think?
Regards.
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 21:33 +0200, Dominik Składanowski wrote:
Hello list.
I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in my opinion very good idea. What do you think?
I was looking at that :)
Question is ... does it really serve a purpose?
The purpose of the distro is to install on servers and workstations. A live CD doesn't do that. Knoppix is very good in this market, so I think the usefulness is limited.
BUT ... one good thing it would do is allow you an easy way to see if your hardware works without downloading the whole shebang ... which is a positive.
We may look at doing this after CentOS-4.1 is done and I have some of the automated scripts working the way I want.
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 16:12, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in my opinion very good idea. What do you think?
I was looking at that :)
Question is ... does it really serve a purpose?
The purpose of the distro is to install on servers and workstations. A live CD doesn't do that. Knoppix is very good in this market, so I think the usefulness is limited.
Some live CDs do have an 'install to hard disk' feature - then you pull in anything else you need from remote repositories.
BUT ... one good thing it would do is allow you an easy way to see if your hardware works without downloading the whole shebang ... which is a positive.
Yes, this is the real value. It give you a 'seeing is believing' view of whether it works in your machine and which software versions are supplied with which bugs fixed *before* you have to overwrite your working system.
We may look at doing this after CentOS-4.1 is done and I have some of the automated scripts working the way I want.
If you can make the iso-building script public, it might also be useful for others to build application demos.
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 17:33 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 16:12, Johnny Hughes wrote:
I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in my opinion very good idea. What do you think?
I was looking at that :)
Question is ... does it really serve a purpose?
The purpose of the distro is to install on servers and workstations. A live CD doesn't do that. Knoppix is very good in this market, so I think the usefulness is limited.
Some live CDs do have an 'install to hard disk' feature - then you pull in anything else you need from remote repositories.
BUT ... one good thing it would do is allow you an easy way to see if your hardware works without downloading the whole shebang ... which is a positive.
Yes, this is the real value. It give you a 'seeing is believing' view of whether it works in your machine and which software versions are supplied with which bugs fixed *before* you have to overwrite your working system.
We may look at doing this after CentOS-4.1 is done and I have some of the automated scripts working the way I want.
If you can make the iso-building script public, it might also be useful for others to build application demos.
This seems like the perfect project for someone OTHER than the CentOS team to tackle.
By all means, have at it.
Preston
Johnny Hughes wrote:
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 21:33 +0200, Dominik Składanowski wrote:
Hello list.
I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in my opinion very good idea. What do you think?
I was looking at that :)
Question is ... does it really serve a purpose?
Well, from my perspective as a user, what I was looking for when I found CentOS was not a LiveCD, but RHEL without the service contract. One of the reasons for that was that Fedora Legacy started off with big plans. We're gonna support RH7.3 and RH8.0 and RH9 forever, and we're gonna support, FC1, and FC2, etc. on a 1,2,3, out basis. That's ambitious. They finally gave up on RH8.0 but are still holding onto 7.3, 9, FC1, FC2. And as of now, any honest observer would have to say that the only currently supported distro is FC3, and that by the Fedora community and not Fedora-legacy. Fedora-legacy was too ambitious and everyone suffered. The last updates for FC2 are from Apr 7. The last for the other versions came out on Feb 27.
Now, of course, in the open-source world, people work on what they want to work on, and its really nobody else's business. But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
-Steve Bergman
On 5/12/05, Steve Bergman steve@rueb.com wrote:
But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
-Steve Bergman
Have to agree Steve.
I like CentOS as it's excellent for a RHEL clone without the $ tag.
I think a Live distro if required is better suited under : http://caos.caosity.org/
Cheers,
Matt.
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 16:55 +1000, Matt Bottrell wrote:
On 5/12/05, Steve Bergman steve@rueb.com wrote:
But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
-Steve Bergman
Have to agree Steve.
I like CentOS as it's excellent for a RHEL clone without the $ tag.
I think a Live distro if required is better suited under : http://caos.caosity.org/
Cheers,
Agree and agree.
I recently made the switch and I really like both the community and the OS. The best OS I've ever used. Period. Please don't stray.
Preston
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 16:55 +1000, Matt Bottrell wrote:
On 5/12/05, Steve Bergman steve@rueb.com wrote:
But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
-Steve Bergman
Have to agree Steve.
I like CentOS as it's excellent for a RHEL clone without the $ tag.
I think a Live distro if required is better suited under : http://caos.caosity.org/
Just for the record ... The CentOS Project is no longer affiliated with the cAos foundation.
-}Just for the record ... The CentOS Project is no longer affiliated with -}the cAos foundation.
what does that mean to us? good or bad or?
- rh
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 08:35 -0700, Robert Hanson wrote:
-}Just for the record ... The CentOS Project is no longer affiliated with -}the cAos foundation.
what does that mean to us? good or bad or?
- rh
Doesn't matter at all concerning CentOS releases, updates, developers, etc. This has been the case for almost 2 months (since March 20th) ... you will notice that CentOS is no longer listed on the www.caosity.org site. See the first post on the announce list: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2005-March/000001.html
The CentOS Project is operating as it was from a technology standpoint. As you can see by the speed of our updates and the speed with which we released our 4.0 distro, CentOS has never been stronger.
There were issues of size required for the mirrors, who controls what servers, who makes decisions on which items are in the tree, when will certain point releases be retired, etc. We (the CentOS Project) felt that CentOS user's best interests would be served if Lance Davis were running the CentOS show.
The issues with the upstream provider and how to respond:
http://www.centos.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=66
were just the last in many issues where decisions for the project were being made without what we considered enough input from the developers. So, CentOS and the cAos foundation have gone in different directions.
The innovations that you currently see happening in CentOS (a desktop type kernel, single CD installers, CentOSPlus items that are integrated tightly with the base distro) will continue for those who want these innovations ... but remove the extras, contrib, centosplus repositories and CentOS will still be a rock solid Enterprise rebuild that is completely free, released as soon as humanly possible, rapidly updated, and technically compatible {down to the same bugs :)} with the upstream product.
--------------------- The short answer ... you will notice no impact :)
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 17:38 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: <snip>
Doesn't matter at all concerning CentOS releases, updates, developers, etc. This has been the case for almost 2 months (since March 20th) ... you will notice that CentOS is no longer listed on the www.caosity.org site. See the first post on the announce list: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2005-March/000001.html
The CentOS Project is operating as it was from a technology standpoint. As you can see by the speed of our updates and the speed with which we released our 4.0 distro, CentOS has never been stronger.
There were issues of size required for the mirrors, who controls what servers, who makes decisions on which items are in the tree, when will certain point releases be retired, etc. We (the CentOS Project) felt that CentOS user's best interests would be served if Lance Davis were running the CentOS show.
The issues with the upstream provider and how to respond:
http://www.centos.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=66
were just the last in many issues where decisions for the project were being made without what we considered enough input from the developers. So, CentOS and the cAos foundation have gone in different directions.
The innovations that you currently see happening in CentOS (a desktop type kernel, single CD installers, CentOSPlus items that are integrated tightly with the base distro) will continue for those who want these innovations ... but remove the extras, contrib, centosplus repositories and CentOS will still be a rock solid Enterprise rebuild that is completely free, released as soon as humanly possible, rapidly updated, and technically compatible {down to the same bugs :)} with the upstream product.
The short answer ... you will notice no impact :)
And ... just for the record again, I want to make sure that everyone understands that I am not saying anything negative about anyone at the cAos Foundation. They are nice people and have good products. I think the cinch installer is very nice ... as is Warewulf. cAos-2 is a fine distro, try it out.
It was just time for them to do what is best for cAos and us to do what is best for CentOS.
On Thu, 12 May 2005, Matt Bottrell wrote:
On 5/12/05, Steve Bergman steve@rueb.com wrote:
But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
-Steve Bergman
Have to agree Steve.
I like CentOS as it's excellent for a RHEL clone without the $ tag.
I think a Live distro if required is better suited under : http://caos.caosity.org/
I dont really see what difference it makes to anyone if we decide to make a live cd of CentOS ???
It does not mean that there would be any change to the main release of the distro, just that people would be able to see what it is like and test it for hardware compatibility without installing.
It is a decision that will be taken by the CentOS development team.
and by the way CentOS is nothing to do with caos.caosity.org
Regards
Lance
-- uklinux.net - The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 12:25 +0100, Lance Davis wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2005, Matt Bottrell wrote:
On 5/12/05, Steve Bergman steve@rueb.com wrote:
But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
-Steve Bergman
Have to agree Steve.
I like CentOS as it's excellent for a RHEL clone without the $ tag.
I think a Live distro if required is better suited under : http://caos.caosity.org/
I dont really see what difference it makes to anyone if we decide to make a live cd of CentOS ???
That sounds a little defensive. I hope you're not taking this personally. I don't think anyone is saying the CentOS development team isn't "allowed" to do a live cd. And the idea is perfectly fine for testing out hardware compatibility, etc. My personal opinion was just that I would hate for it to take any focus away from the distribution running smoothly, or the purpose the distribution. Nothing more.
Preston
-
Dominik Składanowski -
Johnny Hughes -
Lance Davis -
Les Mikesell -
Matt Bottrell -
Preston Crawford -
Robert Hanson -
Steve Bergman