[CentOS-devel] Why not a fusion between CentOS and SL?

Wed Mar 23 10:00:23 UTC 2011
Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office at plnet.rs>

carlopmart wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 10:27 AM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> Scientific Linux uses upstream source to create their own repo, without
>> desire to be 100% compatible.
>> CentOS project is dedicated to provide (as close as possible) 100%
>> compatibility. It's not just a rebuild of upstream sources, goal is tu
>> *duplicate* RHEL.
>> It's that simple. And this was answer many times in this and other
>> mailing lists, forum threads....
>> Ljubomir
> I know that SL includes some custom components like OpenAFS in their 
> distribution, but base system is the same as CentOS. Then, I repeat, why 
> not?

Then, I repeat, because SL *does not care* to build 100% *binary* 
compatible packages, fo r CentOS it's a must.

Look at it this way. Upstream is a Coca-Cola Co. SL is Pepsi. They use 
publicly available formulas from upstream in order to create product 
that is as good as upstreams, but is not *the 100% same* since their 
production formulas are not ***100%/absolutely*** the same.

In this analogy, CentOS is the industrial espionage guy who constantly 
steals new formulas from upstream in order to create **exact/100%** 
replicas of upstream product. For better analogy, lets say that 
acquiring that formula is illegal.

So, how do you propose that Pepsi and counterfeit work together.

P.S. "counterfeit" is extremely wrong to say for CentOS, but analogy 
demands clear distinction of persons involved, so I beg all to forgive 
me  for this.