[CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 3:53 PM Simon Matter <simon.matter at invoca.ch> wrote:

> > On 12/10/20 4:19 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> I do
> >> want to say that with CentOS Stream, we're committed to developing a
> >> stable and world class project that literally produces RHEL.  I hope
> >> in the future if you decide to revisit your OS choice that you take a
> >> moment and see what we're doing here.  I think you might find that
> >> we're working very hard to avoid the things you're concerned about,
> >> because we*need*  to avoid those same things in RHEL anyway.
> >
> >
> > I think it might be fair to say that CentOS Stream can't accomplish Red
> > Hat's goals if it has no users, and it won't have any users if it isn't
> > reliable.  The people who are alarmed that CentOS Stream will be
> > suddenly unreliable aren't thinking clearly about Red Hat's intent for
> > that distribution.
> >
>
> I understand why RedHat came up with the idea of CentOS Stream and it
> makes sense for them. BUT, something is missing for many of us and it will
> probably greatly reduce the number of users of CentOS Stream and as such,
> reduce the positive effects CS could have. The problem is that the stable
> part of CentOS Linux is missing in future and may prevent many of us from
> using CentOS Stream as well.
>
> What I could probably live with is:
> - Create point releases of CentOS Stream at the same time like the RHEL
> releases.
> - Feed point releases with updates like RHEL updates.
> - Clearly tag CentOS Stream different than RHEL, clX?
> - CS can contain changes which are not made in RHEL
> - CS kernel disables less modules to enhance support for older hardware
> not supported in RHEL anymore.
> - CS packages may enable features not enabled and therefore supported7 in
> RHEL
> - CS may not be absolutely identical to RHEL but as stable as RHEL in
> general.
>
>
What you describe is... wait for it... CentOS 8!!

Why can't we just keep having that, like we were promised?



> That means, folks who run commercial software need to run it on RHEL to
> have support and be absolutely sure things work. If they pay for
> commercial software they should also pay RedHat!
>
>
Sorry, no. Budgets are tight/non-existant. And it's not just software
that's supported by CentOS X.X. Ever call Dell for hardware support, for a
failed hard drive? "What operating system are you running? What version?"



> Those using only free software can use CentOS point releases where they
> need most stability and run CentOS Stream where they can do it and by
> doing so help with development of upstream. Most IT people, developers and
> admins will most likely be willing to run CentOS Stream and be part of a
> fruitful community.
>
> Looking forward to hear your ideas.
>
> Simon
>
>
All I want is what we had before it was taken away. That's it.



-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook <http://cfa.harvard.edu/facebook> | Twitter
<http://cfa.harvard.edu/twitter> | YouTube <http://cfa.harvard.edu/youtube>
| Newsletter <http://cfa.harvard.edu/newsletter>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20201211/6f9531a7/attachment.html>