> On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 4:12 PM Chris Mair <chris at 1006.org> wrote: > >> > But as a business, since you're not providing >> > Red Hat with profit (none of our communities are), what are you >> providing >> > that would result in continued sponsorship of a downstream rebuild? >> >> Installation count share? >> >> Without CenOS Linux you'll look at 1% of Linux servers running RHEL (I'm >> sure >> you have a more precise number, and I'm sure it will be as >> embarrassing...). >> >> In a world without CentOS Linux why should I pay for RH courses? Why >> should I >> renew my RHCE? Why should educators choose such a rare distribution >> to teach Linux? At this point why not go with Ubuntu? Debian? Why teach >> yum/dnf when most servers will use apt? >> >> > This one is interesting and one we discussed in length. Unfortunately, if > you look at any "top" list. Ubuntu is clumped together, and Red Hat gets > broken out into Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS. As for why educators would pick > a "rare" distribution, because we're going to have a program that caters > directly to education. > That's exactly what Google, Apple and Microsoft do - and I absolutely do not like it and do not support any such company and teach my kids to stay away as far as they can and also explain them why. > >> You say us (the community) isn't providing you (Red Hat) with profit. >> Well, >> who do you think installed CentOS Linux and recommended RHEL to our >> pointy >> haired bosses that wanted support contracts? >> >> Maybe you sold 1 RHEL subscription for any 100 CentOS we installed. >> >> Well, now you're going to sell exactly 0 RHEL subscriptions for any of >> the >> 100 Ubuntu or Debian boxes I'm going to set up with my clients. >> >> > Unfortunately with these last ones we've seen no evidence of this > happening > (where CentOS is actually leading to RHEL sales. We have seen a little > evidence of the opposite. Where we once had RHEL sales, and now have > CentOS. Why? "They're both built by Red Hat, right?" > At least for my environments in the last two decades I can tell you you are completely wrong here. And you can not know it because nobody who bought RedHat because of me told you so. They just ordered servers from $VENDOR with bundled RH subscriptions and renewed them together with all other software. > >> Before you say "Stream", the single most killer argument against Stream >> is that you have broken any trust when you moved the EOL of CentOS Linux >> 8 >> from 2029 to 2021. >> >> > I think we lost a lot of trust due to a pretty serious mix-up about the > EOL > date announcement, but I don't think it has erased all the good Red Hat > has > done and continues to do. > > > Now Red Hat employees jump through hoops to tell us how great that'll be. >> What >> guerantees that in two year's time you're not going to kill Stream >> because >> "it didn't >> provide anything to RH"? >> >> > Nothing, we and all companies kill products all the time. I don't recall > this level of outrage over mugshot. We're taking a big risk with Stream > and if it doesn't work out, we'll make changes there too as we should. It > makes no sense to continue doing something that isn't working out. > > Maybe this is the biggest point: we just couldn't believe RedHat is like "all companies" :( Regards, Simon > >> Somebody already mentioned "fool me once..."... >> >> I'm still angry and I still cannot believe you appear to be oblivious to >> the huge >> blunder you made with this incredible EOL shortening. You've basically >> killed the >> CentOS brand in one single move. >> >> > We're not oblivious to it. If this were any other organization or > relationship, we'd help make amends by giving you your money back. That's > just not an option here. And you can say we killed it all you want, what > we've done is significantly change it. You may not recognize it anymore > but there are many people on this list who we talked to before the > announcement and that we've seen now who are actually interested in coming > on this journey with us. Thats good. > > I suspect the very trust that you all were putting in Red Hat to continue > to produce CentOS Linux as though it were actually a 10-year > enterprise-grade distribution for production was part of the problem here. > To further demonstrate that problem, many of the replies I've seen look as > though people did their risk assessments with "we're relying on Red Hat > for > our OS" instead of "We're relying on a community for our OS." I'd imagine > some of you are having very awkward conversations with your management > chain about this. No one using Fedora or WildFly thinks that way. > > We wanted CentOS to flourish in development environments, in upstream Open > Source CI, and to help with things like OpenStack. I'm not sure if we > accomplished any of that. For those that think perhaps that was the > mistake all those years ago, I personally agree with you. > > -Mike > > >> Bye, >> Chris. >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS-devel mailing list >> CentOS-devel at centos.org >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel >> >> > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel >