On 17/01/14 11:12 AM, IonPacepa wrote: > I view this as a takeover. I view this as a few who kept how to rebuild RHEL > a state secret benefiting financially. I don't see how a community benefits > when we cannot recreate for ourselves what is being done here. I don't see > how we benefit when a large company comes in and buys their way into the > board and pays off all members. Where is the Community's say in this? This > is a payoff. Will we get releases sooner? Will we know how to rebuild the > build environment for ourselves? What if Redhat slowly makes using CentOS > painful to incentivize using RHEL? If Redhat had good intentions why don't > they give unsupported RHEL for free themselves. Granted the probably want to > keep OEL and the like from being able to freely rebuild and plagiarize and > charge money for their stuff, but we , the Community, the masses of users, > are stuck now between behemoths and their lackeys taking payouts throwing us > whatever table scraps they want and we are powerless to change this. > > There is no makeworld or emerge world here, just binaries that magically get > produced and peppered on an ftp whenever someone gets around to it. One of the beautiful things about open source is the ability to fork, create a new project, etc. CentOS was never under any requirement to release their build methods. Whether that was a good or bad choice is not very relevant now. If you (and others) feel that the build process needed to create a binary compatible is a worthy goal, you can start a project to do just that. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education?