On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 20:57:18 -0500 "Phelps, Matthew" <mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 8:47 PM Rob Thomas <xrobau at gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm sure it was just phrasing. Perhaps if you asked 'Was this > > decision forced on the CentOS board?' you'd get a different answer. > > > Johnny mentioned in another thread that the CentOS Board made their > choice because of the option of a RedHat Liaison overrule hanging > over them. > > In other words, yes; they were forced by RedHat. Probably under pressure from IBM 'we need more profit - we don't care how you get it'. Plausible deniability. "It wasn't us that forced them to do it" Maybe the RHEL CTO got his metaphors muddled here too. Or was feeling unwell. Or was being just 'economical with the truth': "So, if you need a stable RHEL-like operating system, CentOS will still be there for you. But, if you need to keep up with your competitors who are building new cloud and container-based applications, CentOS Stream will work better for you." 'To be exact, CentOS Stream is an upstream development platform for ecosystem developers. It will be updated several times a day. This is not a production operating system. It's purely a developer's distro.' "Old school CentOS isn't going anywhere. Stream is available in parallel with the existing CentOS builds. In other words, "nothing changes for current users of CentOS." " Chris Wright, Red Hat's CTO September 24, 2019 https://www.zdnet.com/article/red-hat-introduces-rolling-release-centos-stream/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20201209/9d1474d6/attachment-0005.sig>