I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
Hi, I think you miss understood or the authors of the article about 'Redhat offering their Linux free'. Can you please provide your source?
First of all it's the distro that has been offered for 'free', but only for developers. Please read the original press release:
https://www.redhat.com/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-expands-red-hat-devel...
As for your question about 'changing things'. There's non for you and not for Centos.
In regards, Maikel
On 04/04/2016 03:39 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
Yes, they are providing free version only for "developer use". -- Eero
2016-04-04 16:39 GMT+03:00 Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
-- Timothy Murphy gayleard /at/ eircom.net School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hello Timothy,
On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:39:54 +0100 Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
Wow, it's not really offered as "free", it's a 30-day evaluation. Try and buy. You won't get support after this is you don't subscribe to their services and I have no idea what will happen if you can updates or whatever, even for non-production uses.
Quoting https://access.redhat.com/products/red-hat-enterprise-linux/evaluation:
================================== Try Red Hat Enterprise Linux free
Evaluate Red Hat Enterprise Linux for your application deployments, datacenter infrastructure or virtual and cloud environments. Red Hat Enterprise Linux provides a reliable a secure operating system that you can trust to run your most mission critical workloads.
This evaluation:
Provides a single subscription for a variant of Red Hat Enterprise Linux Offers access to Red Hat's award winning Customer Portal, including knowledge, videos, and documentation Is not intended for production use
Start your evaluation
You will need a Red Hat account to continue. If you are new to Red Hat, you can create an account in the next step. ==================================
Regards,
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
On 04/04/2016 08:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
Here is the link for the download:
Yes, but this is not still (very) big change as redhat partner companies get rhel linsences for developer / internal use for free.
-- Eero
2016-04-04 16:55 GMT+03:00 Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org:
On 04/04/2016 08:53 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
Here is the link for the download:
http://developers.redhat.com/products/rhel/get-started/
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, April 4, 2016 8:53 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
When I think about it I have a strange feeling. To be (become) a developer of something that you yourself will not be able to use in production... it's akin volunteer to become a slave. Is there anybody who _can_ make a sense of such offer?
Valeri
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Valeri Galtsev galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu wrote:
On Mon, April 4, 2016 8:53 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
When I think about it I have a strange feeling. To be (become) a developer of something that you yourself will not be able to use in production... it's akin volunteer to become a slave. Is there anybody who _can_ make a sense of such offer?
Valeri
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi,
As things stand, you can signup for a Red Hat Developer Subscription for free to get full access to all Red Hat products as a developer. Yes, you cannot deploy Red Hat products in production with this subscription but anything you develop on it can be put into a production system which has a valid production grade Red Hat Subscription which has been paid for.
Yes, this helps at least "single" developers and people that are training for rhce / rhcsa exam..
br, -- Eero
2016-04-04 17:16 GMT+03:00 Mohammed Zeeshan mohammed.zee1000@gmail.com:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Valeri Galtsev galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu wrote:
On Mon, April 4, 2016 8:53 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
When I think about it I have a strange feeling. To be (become) a
developer
of something that you yourself will not be able to use in production... it's akin volunteer to become a slave. Is there anybody who _can_ make a sense of such offer?
Valeri
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome
move
by Red Hat.
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Hi,
As things stand, you can signup for a Red Hat Developer Subscription for free to get full access to all Red Hat products as a developer. Yes, you cannot deploy Red Hat products in production with this subscription but anything you develop on it can be put into a production system which has a valid production grade Red Hat Subscription which has been paid for.
-- *Mohammed Zeeshan Ahmed, * B.E Computer Science Engineering Certified IT & Cloud Architect & RHCSA +919986458839 Bengaluru, India
https://mohammedzee1000.wordpress.com/ http://mohammed-zeeshan.strikingly.com _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 4 April 2016 at 15:22, Eero Volotinen eero.volotinen@iki.fi wrote:
Yes, this helps at least "single" developers and people that are training for rhce / rhcsa exam..
Note that this also gives access to the Red Hat Knowledgebase and to beta downloads both of which can be useful for any CentOS sysadmin.
On 4/4/2016 7:22 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
Yes, this helps at least "single" developers and people that are training for rhce / rhcsa exam..
it also helps development groups in big corporate environments as they won't have to budget and pay annual subscription fees to maintain their development systems.
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Mohammed Zeeshan mohammed.zee1000@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
As things stand, you can signup for a Red Hat Developer Subscription for free to get full access to all Red Hat products as a developer. Yes, you cannot deploy Red Hat products in production with this subscription but anything you develop on it can be put into a production system which has a valid production grade Red Hat Subscription which has been paid for.
Reads like the MSDN program from a Redmond based company. Good to know though -- thanks.
-- Arun Khan
On 04/04/16 10:06 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Mon, April 4, 2016 8:53 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
When I think about it I have a strange feeling. To be (become) a developer of something that you yourself will not be able to use in production... it's akin volunteer to become a slave. Is there anybody who _can_ make a sense of such offer?
Valeri
Our company has been in Red Hat's ISV program for ages, and it is very helpful. There are differences between how CentOS and RHEL works, so being able to test against both makes it much easier for our users (community users and paid customers) to choose which system they want. I also means that we can be sure those who choose RHEL proper will have no problems.
We also use the RHEL installs for demos and trade shows, which is important. Like it or not, there is a certain "professionalism" to being able to demo your product on RHEL instead of CentOS. Most customers insist on RHEL so seeing the product running already on RH is a useful sales tool.
In short; The ISV program has been very helpful and benefited both RH and our company.
And (big) commercial vendors/users always prefer RHEL as it commercially supported platform.
-- Eero
2016-04-04 17:25 GMT+03:00 Digimer lists@alteeve.ca:
On 04/04/16 10:06 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Mon, April 4, 2016 8:53 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
When I think about it I have a strange feeling. To be (become) a
developer
of something that you yourself will not be able to use in production... it's akin volunteer to become a slave. Is there anybody who _can_ make a sense of such offer?
Valeri
Our company has been in Red Hat's ISV program for ages, and it is very helpful. There are differences between how CentOS and RHEL works, so being able to test against both makes it much easier for our users (community users and paid customers) to choose which system they want. I also means that we can be sure those who choose RHEL proper will have no problems.
We also use the RHEL installs for demos and trade shows, which is important. Like it or not, there is a certain "professionalism" to being able to demo your product on RHEL instead of CentOS. Most customers insist on RHEL so seeing the product running already on RH is a useful sales tool.
In short; The ISV program has been very helpful and benefited both RH and our company.
-- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Mon, April 4, 2016 9:25 am, Digimer wrote:
On 04/04/16 10:06 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Mon, April 4, 2016 8:53 am, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly. Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
You need read the usage license.
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
When I think about it I have a strange feeling. To be (become) a developer of something that you yourself will not be able to use in production... it's akin volunteer to become a slave. Is there anybody who _can_ make a sense of such offer?
Valeri
Our company has been in Red Hat's ISV program for ages, and it is very helpful. There are differences between how CentOS and RHEL works, so being able to test against both makes it much easier for our users (community users and paid customers) to choose which system they want. I also means that we can be sure those who choose RHEL proper will have no problems.
We also use the RHEL installs for demos and trade shows, which is important. Like it or not, there is a certain "professionalism" to being able to demo your product on RHEL instead of CentOS. Most customers insist on RHEL so seeing the product running already on RH is a useful sales tool.
In short; The ISV program has been very helpful and benefited both RH and our company.
Thanks, everybody. I knew there are clever people who can help poor one to understand something that doesn't seem to make any sense. Which it actually does once someone helped you to see bigger picture.
Valeri
-- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
You need read the usage license.
I glanced through this before downloading the ISO. But I can't locate it now on the RedHat website(s).
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries), and have no ambition to make money from them, which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.
Surely there must be many CentOS users like me? I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes) that RedHat's offer is of little value.
On 04/05/2016 11:06 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
You need read the usage license.
I glanced through this before downloading the ISO. But I can't locate it now on the RedHat website(s).
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries), and have no ambition to make money from them, which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.
No, it is not. Please check out the definition of 'production' software in relation to staging,testing and development. "
Techopedia explains Production Server
A production server is the core server on which any website or Web application is being hosted and accessed by users. It is part of the entire software and application development environment. Typically, the production server environment, hardware and software components are exactly similar to a staging server.
Though, rather being confined to in-house usage as in a staging server, the production server is open for end-user access. The software or application must be tested and debugged on a staging server before being deployed on the production server."
Surely there must be many CentOS users like me? I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes) that RedHat's offer is of little value.
Centos != Redhat
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 11:17 +0200, Maikel van Leeuwen wrote:
Techopedia explains Production ServerA production server is the core server on which any website or Web application is being hosted and accessed by users. It is part of the entire software and application development environment. Typically, the production server environment, hardware and software components are exactly similar to a staging server.
Though, rather being confined to in-house usage as in a staging server, the production server is open for end-user access. The software or application must be tested and debugged on a staging server before being deployed on the production server."
That is not applicable legally.
What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's stated terms and conditions - definitely not what what someone else has put on a web site.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Always Learning centos@u64.u22.net wrote:
What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's stated terms and conditions - definitely not what what someone else has put on a web site.
Here is the link:
https://developers.redhat.com/terms-and-conditions/
Akemi
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 08:16 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Always Learning centos@u64.u22.net wrote:
What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's stated terms and conditions - definitely not what someone else has put on a web site.
Here is the link:
Thanks Akemi.
I remind everyone, who is interested, that the absence of clearly expressed definitions in
https://developers.redhat.com/terms-and-conditions/
(a) 'development purposes only'
(b) 'a production installation'
and the lack of specific detail on http://www.redhat.com/en/about/licenses (English version)
means Red Hat would experience difficulties proving commercial loss, other than a subscription fee loss.
Even a subscription fee loss might be difficult for Red Hat to prove taking into consideration Red Hat knew, or had good cause to know or was recklessly indifferent to users comprehensively knowing precisely what Red Hat meant by (a) and (b) above.
A defendant could argue that Red Hat deliberately withheld that vital knowledge from the unsuspecting users because Red Hat sought to exploit users lack of full and detailed knowledge of the restrictions by extorting money from users for commercial gain - a gain that would not have been available to Red Hat if Red Hat had been a lot more specific about the full extent of its limitations.
One could legally argue that a criminal fraud was committed by obtaining a free copy when the intention was to use it for conspicuous commercial purposes. That argument is unlikely to apply to a person running their own private system for non-commercial gain.
Don't be frightened by Red Hat's statement "are required to pay the applicable subscription fees, in addition to any and all other remedies available to Red Hat under applicable law"
"Other remedies" is fantasy. No one can possible legally commit themselves to unknown and undefined "other remedies" as Red Hat's lawyers should know. Seems like US of A style "bullying tactics" intended to frighten people without access to affordable competent legal advice.
Me ? Well I am staying on C6 :-)
On 04/05/2016 11:55 AM, Always Learning wrote:
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 08:16 -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Always Learning centos@u64.u22.net wrote:
What matters for the 'free' Red Hat software is ***ONLY*** Red Hat's stated terms and conditions - definitely not what someone else has put on a web site.
Here is the link:
Thanks Akemi.
I remind everyone, who is interested, that the absence of clearly expressed definitions in
Actually, they are clearly defined here: http://www.redhat.com/licenses/GLOBAL_Appendix_one_English_20160111.pdf There are several (legal) documents at redhat.com that defines the details and conditions of any subscription. All of which has to be accepted as part of any subscription purchase.
(a) 'development purposes only'
Which is defined as "“Development Purposes” means using the Software for the specific purpose of (a) individual developers writing software code, (b) single-user prototyping, quality assurance or testing and/or (c) demonstrating software or hardware that runs with or on the Software".
(b) 'a production installation'
Which is defined as "“Production Purposes” means using the Software (a) in a production environment, (b) generally using live data and/or applications for a purpose other than Development Purposes, (c) for multi-user prototyping, quality assurance and testing and/or (d) for backup instances". (as per the appendix linked above).
and the lack of specific detail on http://www.redhat.com/en/about/licenses (English version)
Note the two links at the bottom of that page? You'll find the first appendix I linked above there.
means Red Hat would experience difficulties proving commercial loss, other than a subscription fee loss.
Now, do you think Red Hat has been selling subscriptions for 15+ years now without having to enforce their subscription agreements legally?
Even a subscription fee loss might be difficult for Red Hat to prove taking into consideration Red Hat knew, or had good cause to know or was recklessly indifferent to users comprehensively knowing precisely what Red Hat meant by (a) and (b) above.
Since you have to sign up to the subscription agreements before you subscribe, that's going to be a hard argument to win. As with everything in the US, every commercial contract is complex and full of "legalese" needed to defend against this type of argumentation ;)
A defendant could argue that Red Hat deliberately withheld that vital knowledge from the unsuspecting users because Red Hat sought to exploit users lack of full and detailed knowledge of the restrictions by extorting money from users for commercial gain - a gain that would not have been available to Red Hat if Red Hat had been a lot more specific about the full extent of its limitations.
One could legally argue that a criminal fraud was committed by obtaining a free copy when the intention was to use it for conspicuous commercial purposes. That argument is unlikely to apply to a person running their own private system for non-commercial gain.
Don't be frightened by Red Hat's statement "are required to pay the applicable subscription fees, in addition to any and all other remedies available to Red Hat under applicable law"
"Other remedies" is fantasy. No one can possible legally commit themselves to unknown and undefined "other remedies" as Red Hat's lawyers should know. Seems like US of A style "bullying tactics" intended to frighten people without access to affordable competent legal advice.
Not sure there's anything to be afraid of unless you're planning to use the developer subscription to maintain anything other than a developer system. The whole point of doing this by Red Hat (full disclosure - I'm a Red Hat employee) is to remove the barrier for the tons of FOSS developers out there who wants to develop on the platform they eventually deploy on. It's not meant to do anything other than that. As a whole, it shouldn't be hard for anyone to find and use RHEL for development purposes.
Me ? Well I am staying on C6 :-)
That's why we have choice. This is not the Microsoft "everyone has to upgrade to Windows 10 like it or not" mentality. CentOS still has a lot of things to offer that you don't get from the free developer subscription.
On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 09:44 -0400, Peter Larsen wrote:
On 04/05/2016 11:55 AM, Always Learning wrote:
Me ? Well I am staying on C6 :-)
That's why we have choice. This is not the Microsoft "everyone has to upgrade to Windows 10 like it or not" mentality. CentOS still has a lot of things to offer that you don't get from the free developer subscription.
I refuse to do anything at all on a Microsoft machine. I feel ill when I see the M$ screens and remember the countless months of my life frustratingly wasted trying to get M$ crap to work. Centos is true liberation and how computer operating systems should be.
I would like the EU to ban the monopoly of M$ on all laptops sold in the EU. Instead of paying the M$ tax, users should have a choice of operating systems.
On Tue, April 12, 2016 1:43 pm, Always Learning wrote:
<snip>
I refuse to do anything at all on a Microsoft machine. I feel ill when I see the M$ screens and remember the countless months of my life frustratingly wasted trying to get M$ crap to work. Centos is true liberation and how computer operating systems should be.
UNIX BSD free derivatives could have been too. Didn't become as widely popular as Linux though ;-)
I would like the EU to ban the monopoly of M$ on all laptops sold in the EU. Instead of paying the M$ tax, users should have a choice of operating systems.
In US you can buy some laptops without MS Windows OS (read: with Linux, most likely Ubuntu) from some small manufacturers... I believe, one could do that in Europe too. I remember, some researches visited us here with laptops they got in Europe with Linux OS - again, from small companies.
Valeri _____________________________________________
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Tue, April 12, 2016 1:43 pm, Always Learning wrote:
<snip> In US you can buy some laptops without MS Windows OS (read: with Linux, most likely Ubuntu) from some small manufacturers... I believe, one
<snip>
I *think* you can buy Dell laptops with no o/s.
mark
Dell provides linux laptops and lenovo too..
Eero 12.4.2016 10.39 ip. m.roth@5-cent.us kirjoitti:
Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Tue, April 12, 2016 1:43 pm, Always Learning wrote:
<snip> In US you can buy some laptops without MS Windows OS (read: with Linux, most likely Ubuntu) from some small manufacturers... I believe, one
<snip>
I *think* you can buy Dell laptops with no o/s.
mark
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Am 05.04.2016 um 11:06 schrieb Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net:
I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries), and have no ambition to make money from them, which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.
Surely there must be many CentOS users like me? I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes) that RedHat's offer is of little value.
The value of the offer depends of your assets and values.
-- LF
On Tue, April 5, 2016 4:06 am, Timothy Murphy wrote:
Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 04/04/2016 08:39 AM, Timothy Murphy wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
You need read the usage license.
I glanced through this before downloading the ISO. But I can't locate it now on the RedHat website(s).
That subscription can only be used in development and not in a production environment.
If that works for want you want to use it for then it is an awesome move by Red Hat.
I run CentOS on two home servers (in different countries), and have no ambition to make money from them, which I take is the meaning of "production" in this context.
Production means you are benefiting from running server in any form. Making money is only one form of benefit. The rest are hard to list without knowing what exactly you do but the general approach in court would be: you will not be running server and not using it for something. Apart from testing that some software builds on that you can not use that server for anything else. And it is not a coincidence that they list explicitly what you can use it for. Because using it for anything else will be illegal (which will be established in court, but I have to mention I am not a lawyer).
I did not read RedHat's license about what we discuss here, but I have carefully been once through Intel compilers non-for-profit license. Scientists who I work for are in "non-for-profit" organizations. What they do, however, does not fall under the "non-for-profit" Intel license. Because that license prohibits to profit in any form (not on by making monetary profit from selling things). Other forms of profit would be: making better code, and potentially getting better job than your colleague to name one.
In general, benefiting can be anything, even looking at nice RedHat logo and being pleased with yourself that you were able to install the system. This is the difference of free license (where you are explicitly permitted to do anything except...) from non-free (where you are explicitly permitted to do this, and nothing else).
But don't listen to me, ask the layer.
Valeri
Surely there must be many CentOS users like me? I found puzzling the suggestion (not by Johnny Hughes) that RedHat's offer is of little value.
-- Timothy Murphy gayleard /at/ eircom.net School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 07:55 -0500, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
Production means you are benefiting from running server in any form. Making money is only one form of benefit. The rest are hard to list without knowing what exactly you do but the general approach in court would be: you will not be running server and not using it for something. Apart from testing that some software builds on that you can not use that server for anything else. And it is not a coincidence that they list explicitly what you can use it for. Because using it for anything else will be illegal (which will be established in court, but I have to mention I am not a lawyer).
Neither am I a lawyer.
Unless the term 'production' is clearly defined in the license, then the popular and widely used meaning of 'production' would constitute the criteria.
It is not for users to define what Red Hat Inc's license implies - that is solely a matter for Read Hat to make ***before*** Red Hat donates its software or unlocks its software for use. Legally, Red Hat could not retrospectively impose any definition of 'production' or introduce licensing or usage terms.
It will not be 'illegal' because it is not a criminal offence unless a law exists forbidding that action. I think that 'exceeding' the terms of the license would not make a criminal offence.
Criminal = public law Non-criminal = private law
The best Red Hat could do is to sue users for Red Hat's 'lost' (just think of the world-wide damaging publicity) and that will mean Red Hat would have to prove to the civil standard of evidence the monetary amount of that loss.
As the alleged 'loss' may occur outside the US of A, Red Hat would have to sue in the legal jurisdiction where that matter occurred.
In England, the Small Claims Courts determines cases up to GBP 10,000 ***and*** the costs of lawyers, I verily believe, are neither awarded nor recoverable.
On 2016-04-04, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
I think it's an excellent opportunity for developers, and for the simply curious.
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly.
You should receive an email confirmation from Red Hat. In my case it only arrived after I had entered my RH account details when installing the new OS. That could just be a coincidence, of course.
Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
Updates are available through yum in the normal way. Dnf is available in the EPEL 7 repository.
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
One thing that struck me is that the (free) developer subscription is valid for only one year. It is not clear whether the subscription can be freely renewed thereafter. I wouldn't advocate a full migration just yet!
On 5 April 2016 at 13:31, Liam O'Toole liam.p.otoole@gmail.com wrote:
On 2016-04-04, Timothy Murphy gayleard@eircom.net wrote:
I read that Redhat was offering their Linux free, and downloaded the ISO, though I haven't run it.
What do CentOS users think of Redhat's offer?
I think it's an excellent opportunity for developers, and for the simply curious.
The registration with Redhat seemed very bureaucratic to me, and I'm not sure if I have carried it out properly.
You should receive an email confirmation from Red Hat. In my case it only arrived after I had entered my RH account details when installing the new OS. That could just be a coincidence, of course.
Also, I didn't see if it was possible to get updates, either with dnf or some other way.
Updates are available through yum in the normal way. Dnf is available in the EPEL 7 repository.
I wouldn't use dnf from EPEL though ;)
I've been (and am) very pleased with CentOS, which I've been running for several years, and I don't particularly want to change.
Any views on this?
One thing that struck me is that the (free) developer subscription is valid for only one year. It is not clear whether the subscription can be freely renewed thereafter. I wouldn't advocate a full migration just yet!
The $99 sub is per year, this is just a free version of that and RH have no way (nor would it be sensible for them to) create an unlimited life subscription on their systems/platform.
How long they'll keep this programme? Well that's crystal ball time and I guess depends on the uptake and how this helps with their developers conferences.
It's not like they lock you in with proprietary tech though ...
-
Akemi Yagi -
Always Learning -
Arun Khan -
Digimer -
Eero Volotinen -
James Hogarth -
John R Pierce -
Johnny Hughes -
Leon Fauster -
Liam O'Toole -
m.roth＠5-cent.us -
Maikel van Leeuwen -
Mohammed Zeeshan -
Peter Larsen -
Timothy Murphy -
Valeri Galtsev -
wwp