On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 07:33 -0400, Simon Perreault wrote: > On Thursday 02 June 2005 19:31, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > No ... not at all. RedHat does not spend any time making sure that the > > people who use CentOS can get free updates. > > I think you will agree with me that the amount of work Red Hat put on CentOS > (by way of RHEL) is much more significant than the work put on CentOS by > CentOS volunteers. That is not to say that the work of CentOS volunteers is > not to be appreciated. Don't get all worked up for nothing. I am a little touchy on this subject ... being that I hear it so often. I disagree ... the work that RedHat put into RHEL is significant. It is a great distro, and worthy to win this award and many others ... but so is CentOS. If you think RHEL is a BETTER distro than CentOS, you should vote that way. BUT ... they didn't put any work into CentOS. All their work was put into RHEL. They are compensated fairly well for that work too, I might add. I, on the other hand, spend an average of 8-12 hours a day on CentOS related activities. As does Karanbir Singh (z00dax on IRC). Most of the other developers spend almost as much time as well. Not only do we not get paid anything for doing that, some of us end up having to pay for centos related things (I have increased my bandwidth, bought compile platforms, changed my home network infrastructure, etc. to be able to better build CentOS and decrease the release times, at my own expense). This is because people using CentOS won't donate even $1, one time, to the project....oh well, such is life. As pointed out many times before on this list, RedHat is a great company, and they do a lot of things for the OSS community ... but they are not the "owners" of the code that CentOS uses. They get almost all the items they publish from somewhere else. They are required, therefore, to make their source code public. They take that requirement seriously, and they do an outstanding job of publishing their source code openly. They should be commended for that. I do it every chance I get :) They published their Source code, as required by the GPL. They added Trademark requirements. We took their GPL work, modified it to comply with their Trademark requirements (we actually go much further than their stated requirements), and to created a distro. A significant amount of their packages have to be modified to build properly ... all of them have to be reviewed. Using your logic, The only people who would get credit are the programmers who write the code for the parent projects. Or the Fedora Core volunteers who actually package and test probably 95% of the stuff that get into RHEL. So no, I don't think that you should vote for RHEL in a place where CentOS is also listed ... any more than I think you should vote for Debian if you use Ubuntu. If CentOS isn't in that poll, then voting for RHEL would be fine. Now, if someone feels that RHEL is a better Distro than CentOS (as distributed) ... then they should absolutely vote for RHEL instead of CentOS. That is, of course, only my opinion. You have yours. We are both entitled to our own. Neither is right or wrong. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050603/a0622275/attachment-0004.sig>