On 9/10/2019 2:21 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Red Hat and IBM need to know how you use CentOS Linux to make RHEL > better or use it to influence buying RHEL .. why don't you blog about it. > > That goes for anyone who uses CentOS Linux and because CentOS Linux > exists, you have RHEL subscriptions. And explain why you would not have > those RHEL subscriptions if CentOS Linux did not exist. > > Thanks, > Johnny hughes I completely understand how this can help... but at the same time I feel like I really don't. The discussion goes beyond just the 7.7 and 8 problems and reaches more into the heart of the relationship between RedHat, CentOS, and Fedora. On the outside, we don't have much transparency as to how much internal communication is happening between all three entities. Is RH not providing enough resources to the CentOS Project? Previous posts from @redhat.com addresses have indicated how important the EL ecosystem is already, so how much justification can someone on the outside provide for it? For that matter, on the Fedora list it seems like it's primarily a resource question in ensuring the x86 build target remains viable, which seems rather odd for a $34B entity which should understand the importance of AltArch usage in tracking down subtle bugs. And of course Fedora itself seems prone to haphazardly adopting new tech with little or no thought to how it could affect downstream users (e.g., Modularity), despite it a) being the upstream for the RHEL release, and b) it having direct control over Fedora EPEL (which needs viable applicability to RHEL and CentOS). It's hard to shake the impression that there's a structural problem at work here. And if so, that warrants more frank communication from RedHat employees and others involved who could be wearing all their various hats at once. -jc