[CentOS-devel] [EXT] Balancing the needs around the CentOS platform

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 1:13 AM Peter Georg
<peter.georg at physik.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
> On 19/12/2020 07.44, Karsten Wade wrote:
> I agree with you that CentOS Stream might actually be a good way forward
> and consider (even looking forward to) switching from CentOS Linux to
> CentOS Stream for the reasons you mentioned.
> However I disagree on one point: You mention CentOS Stream can cover
> "95% (or so)" of the current users. As long as 3rd party drivers are not
> working with CentOS Stream the number will be lower.
> This topic has already been mentioned several times on this mailing list
> by various users. So far feedback has been positive here on the list.
>
> In my opinion, the only way to guarantee compatibility is by 100% kernel
> ABI compatibility. The only way I can think of implementing this is by
> offering an optional "RHEL kernel repository" containing the (updated)
> kernel of the current RHEL minor release. Feedback to this proposal has
> been positive so far as well, but no concrete feedback yet.
> I even suggested this to centos-questions at redhat.com. So far I only got
> a response that I shall wait till next year for no- and low-cost RHEL
> offerings. Let's wait and see if I get a useful answer to my proposal.
>
> Sorry for mentioning this issue once again here on the mailing list, but
> I just hope that by mentioning it often enough, the possibility of this
> issue/proposal being acknowledged goes up.

Hi Peter,

Thanks for mentioning it again- I would encourage anybody else who is
using kernel modules that aren't included in the stock kernel to mail
centos-questions at redhat.com and let us know about it.

Just on list I've read that the ongoing ability to use CentOSPlus,
ELRepo, and a few miscellaneous third party drivers is the difference
between being able to adopt CentOS Stream or not.  My impression is
that if CentOS Stream can provide some mechanism by which people will
be unable to 'dnf update' their way into an unusable system for want
of a compatible kernel module, that somewhat resolves the issue.  I
picture a SIG being formed of community members to create this and
oversee the multiple implementation details that would be necessary
per use case (EG, don't stop ELRepo, provide something that works
smoothly with it).

Coincidentally, for anybody who uses the word "stable" or "unstable",
it's always helpful when you outline what you mean by that.  I'm
personally aware of 4 different meanings, and suspect at least 2 more
are being used here!  This is a good practice for both on-list
discussions and reports to centos-questions at redhat.com.

Finally, I want to mention that a number of Red Hatters are now or
about to be on an end of year holiday.  Consequently, some people who
would normally be joining in constructive conversations are away from
their email.  Please nobody take this as a lack of interest or
concern, they'll be back bright and early next year.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.