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

Konstantin Boyandin

lists at boyandin.info
Mon Dec 28 09:59:49 UTC 2020


On 28.12.2020 00:27, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On su, 27 joulu 2020, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS-devel wrote:
>> On 27.12.2020 23:00, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>> On su, 27 joulu 2020, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS-devel wrote:
>>>> On 27.12.2020 21:48, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>>>> On su, 27 joulu 2020, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/27/20 12:29 PM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>>>>>> On pe, 25 joulu 2020, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Following your approach to a detailed information about the Stream,
>>>>> we've been told there are various RHEL subscription programs coming 
>>>>> next
>>>>> year that would address use of RHEL for many existing CentOS users.
>>>>
>>>> -various RHEL subscription programs
>>>> +various *paid* RHEL subscription programs
>>>
>>> Let's be clear: the above 'diff' is your own opinion and a speculation,
>>> not based on any public information. There are no facts that would
>>> support a claim that future RHEL subscription programs we are promised
>>> will all be paid ones.
>>
>> Let's be clear: quantifier "all" is your own interpretation and was not
>> assumed in my statement.
> 
> I find it strange to add 'paid' where it is not necessary needed to be
> if you have no facts to say so. In fact, Chris Wrights blog is very
> explicit: 
>
 https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux 
> 
> "In the first half of 2021, we plan to introduce low- or no-cost
> programs for a variety of use cases, including options for open source
> projects and communities and expansion of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux
> Developer subscription use cases to better serve the needs of systems
> administrators. We’ll share more details as these initiatives coalesce."

"low" is in accordance with "paid". As for "as these initiatives 
coalesce", I see yet another vague promise. Looks like this decision has 
been taken *post factum* and was, so to say, unplanned.

[...]

>>> Both can be achieved by forming a SIG, contributing some resources, and
>>> having a shared set of common CI tools. CKI already gives a platform to
>>> base on, for kernel-specific components. Fedora Project already gives a
>>> way to organize CIs around similar topics for other components, so
>>> reusing the tooling is definitely possible.
>>
>> The primary moot point of CentOS Stream usability, as I see it, is lack
>> of simple means to rollback (one or more) packages, to restore a
>> predictable software behavior after another daily update breaks 
>> something.
> 
> The simplest solution for these use cases is to actually report a bug
> against RHEL and/or CentOS Stream and make sure it is reproducible. This
> would be the quickest way to get the issue backed out or fixed in a
> number of days. There are means to remove broken packages from RHEL
> composes and I hope we'd have a way to propagate those 'removals' to
> CentOS Stream.
> 
> This is something worth raising as a feature request if it doesn't exist
> yet.

I have doubts it would ever work, but it's worth trying, just to make sure.

-- 
Sincerely,

Konstantin Boyandin
system administrator (ProWide Labs Ltd. - IPHost Network Monitor)


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list