On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 1:09 PM Simon Matter <simon.matter at invoca.ch> wrote: > > Hi Josh, > > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 9:44 AM Simon Matter <simon.matter at invoca.ch> > > wrote: > >> > >> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 7:47 AM Peter Georg > >> > <peter.georg at physik.uni-regensburg.de> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On 22/06/2023 12.56, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> >> > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 6:51 AM Leon Fauster via CentOS-devel > >> >> > <centos-devel at centos.org> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Hi All, > >> >> >> > >> >> >> I wonder if someone is in the role/position to shed some more > >> light > >> >> on > >> >> >> the topic as announced here > >> >> >> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/furthering-evolution-centos-stream > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Any deadlines? Does this target only EL10 or also any current > >> >> release? > >> >> > > >> >> > It is in effect now for RHEL 8 and 9 and will continue for any > >> future > >> >> > RHEL releases. The development and source code for all of these > >> >> > releases will continue to happen through the CentOS Stream project. > >> >> > > >> >> > RHEL 7 and CentOS Linux 7 are not affected. > >> >> > > >> >> >> Would be great if some discussion/communication could be happen. > >> >> Thanks! > >> >> > > >> >> > If you have more questions, please ask and we can try to address > >> them. > >> >> > >> >> I do indeed have a question. The Kmods SIG currently provides > >> artifacts > >> >> for both CentOS Stream and RHEL. To achieve that we have established > >> >> some automation using GitLab CI to avoid human interaction as far as > >> >> possible. For that to work we do need access to the following sources > >> >> from RHEL (version numbers are just examples): > >> >> > >> >> kernel-5.14.0-284.18.1.el9_2.src.rpm > >> >> > >> >> or > >> >> > >> >> linux-5.14.0-284.18.1.el9_2.tar.xz (which is included in the > >> src.rpm). > >> >> > >> >> So far we have downloaded the tarball from git.centos.org/sources > >> >> > >> >> However, my understanding is that new versions of these files will > >> not > >> >> be provided anymore. In fact the example listed here (current RHEL 9 > >> >> kernel) is already not provided anymore. > >> > > >> > Your understanding is correct. > >> > > >> > >> What I don't understand is this: as a Red Hat customer with paid > >> subscription, I'm still able to download > >> kernel-5.14.0-284.18.1.el9_2.src.rpm, right? > > > > Yes. > > > >> If I do so and extract the kernel-5.14.0-284.18.1.el9_2.src.rpm archive, > >> can I put the resulting files on a public server and let others download > >> the files? > > > > The kernel is licensed under the GPL, which grants redistribution > > rights to all such licensed source code. > > > > josh > > Thanks for your answer. I'm still wondering about two things: > > 1) This comment > https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/23/red_hat_centos_move/ says: > > > The key point being is that to obtain those binaries, customers - > > as well as developers on free accounts – must agree to a license > > agreement and are under the terms of a contract, which overrides > > the GPL license of the code itself. > > Is this true? Can anyone set up new rules and just "override" the GPL > license? I would strongly encourage you, as a Red Hat customer, to reach out to Red Hat via the Customer Portal or other contact methods to discuss the Enterprise agreement. Seeking advice on this mailing list or the internet in general about the agreement is probably not in anyone's best interest. > 2) RHEL contains more than "the GPL", fact is it contains source code > licensed under a large amount of different licenses. Is it really possible > to cover and override all of them so easily? It is quite true that RHEL contains source code under a variety of open source licenses, some of which do not require any typical copyleft provisions at all. That said, Red Hat publishes sources to the Customer Portal for all open source packages even if not required, and the source code is available in CentOS Stream as well. > I'd really like to understand what the new announcement of Red Hat means > exactly. I find the blog post very clear about the change. Red Hat is no longer going to publish sources to git.centos.org and instead refers people to CentOS Stream. The discussions around terms and conditions of the enterprise agreement are not affected at all by the change described in the blog post. The agreement did not change and any questions on what it entails are the same now as they were last week. josh