[CentOS] CentOS for commercial use

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2005-04-03 at 12:55 -0600, Collins Richey wrote:

> 
> > Just what 'major work' is it that Red Hat actually does?
> > 
> 
> Probably, when you get right down to it, mostly work with the kernel
> and paying the salaries of some kernel hackers, although the assembly
> of rather well crafted releases certainly qualifies as work.
> 
> Thanks for your input, but please don't assume that I am ignorant of
> the way open software and licensing works. I'm very fond of CentOS (a
> believer in the community support model), and I'm looking for
> ammunition to support it in every way possible.
----
1 - the kernel is GPL

any customizations that Red Hat makes and distributes MUST be released
to the community per the GPL license. That is the point of the GPL
license. To their benefit, they are using the kernel which includes code
by others who have likewise contributed.

2 - assembly - aye, there's the rub

of course there's a lot of community involvement in the development and
testing of the assembly - that's presently called Fedora. It used to be
called Red Hat Linux.

I am not criticizing Red Hat's efforts nor their contributions. They are
symbiotic to Red Hat's formation, growth and profitability as a
corporation. Likewise, they have substantially benefited from a code
base that they didn't contribute to either. Where would they be without
sendmail and apache?

As for the concept of ammunition - CentOS is a distribution and is only
different from Debian or SuSE or Gentoo in that it uses RHEL packaging
methodology. The concept that CentOS is doing something improper by
using RHEL packaging is somewhat of an insult to the people that do the
packaging for CentOS and unduly credits Red Hat for ownership of that
which they cannot own.

Craig