[CentOS-devel] First round of RHEL programs announced

On Sun, Jan 24, 2021, at 8:13 PM, Mark Mielke wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 3:04 PM Josh Boyer <jwboyer at redhat.com> wrote:
> > I made no threat.  I pointed out that we provide sources to packages,
> > regardless of whether they were GPL or not and any recent
> > announcements haven't changed that.
> 
> For "we provide source to packages", this was my understanding:
> 
> 1) RHEL packages are available in SRPM form from a public FTP site.

No longer the case. Now only accessible in git.

> 2) RHEL EUS packages are available in SRPM form only to subscribers
> with EUS subscriptions.

Correct. Also included with the Free Developer Program. (Very helpful for ensuring compatibility, IMO.)

> 3) RHEL ELS packages are available in SRPM form only to subscribers
> with ELS subscriptions.

These are not included with the Free Developer Subscription.

> When it comes to CentOS Linux, CentOS Linux aligned with 1). It never
> aligned with 2) or 3).
> 
> With CentOS Stream, I believe 1) will also disappear. The reference to
> git.centos.org seems to be glossing over that git.centos.org does not
> contain the RHEL / RHEL EUS / RHEL ELS package sources, but only
> includes the *CentOS* sources. And if CentOS Stream continues, then
> CentOS Stream sources will receive updates, but if CentOS Linux does
> not continue, then it seems doubtful that CentOS Linux sources will
> receive updates. Meaning, that by 2022, I expect the RHEL sources to
> no longer be available via git.centos.org, and the idea that
> "announcements haven't change that" is likely to be false. I think
> announcements have definitely changed this.
> 
> But, let's come back to this in a year and see who is right.

I agree with your assessment and fear Rocky Linux et al. will have to resort to using "bootleg" SRPMs if/when RH stops publishing the RHEL branched code to CentOS git. (Their statements to date indicate they'll continue publishing these, but I don't count on it.)

V/r,
James Cassell