[CentOS] CentOS for commercial use

Sun Apr 3 18:40:21 UTC 2005
Avtar Gill <avtargill at gmail.com>

Collins Richey wrote:
> My employer is a firm believer in RHEL - license costs are just a
> business decision.

As am I.  Usually license costs are a business decision - in this case 
we have a perfectly legal and free alternative.  Some people probably 
wouldn't be paying Red Hat even if CentOS didn't exist - they can choose 
other free Linux distributions.

With that being said, some of my clients need Oracle and Novell software 
that requires them to use RHEL or SLES so it makes sense for them to 
purchase licenses and not go with CentOS.  I don't think I'm off here by 
saying that if Red Hat decided they didn't want projects like CentOS to 
exist then that wouldn't imply an automatic, *drastic* increase in new 
RHEL subscriptions.

> I would like to know how those of you who use CentOS in commercial
> endeavors justify the decsion - ethics, community vs. vendor support,
> etc., etc. I've heard many comments to the effect that we CentOS users
> are just leaches, since RedHat does the major work.

Red Hat believes in the open source philosophy and thus offer their RHEL 
SRPMs to everyone - it's GPL software for the most part anyway.  They 
would rather sell their support services.  People who use CentOS want a 
free, open source operating system and our willing to support themselves 
rather than rely on commercial support.  We help Red Hat isolate and fix 
bugs in their commercial offerings.  I don't think either party is being 
selfish with this kind of symbiotic relationship in place.