> Am 08.12.2020 um 18:02 schrieb Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu>: > > The whole point of CentOS was so that we didn't have to "engage." We don't > have time for that. > You do understand that Open Source does not work like that? > We just want a stable re-compile of RHEL, as promised. CentOS has been > diverging from this for a while (note the change in version names/numbers) > and we DON'T WANT THAT! If you cannot justify the expenses for RHEL, then you need to compromise. That’s like requesting free Windows licenses. Either use Fedora, or CentOS Stream or something different. You will likely find, however, that most Open Source software is driven by the people who commit code (the successful ones at least). Those who commit code are nowadays usually employed by a company, which in itself either makes money directly or indirectly from the work of the people who commit the code. So, you will quickly be back to square one, unless you want to run stuff like Debian or Ubuntu, which are mainly Linux-kernel+some stuff nowadays, whereas RHEL + CentOS forms a complete system (with additional software that RedHat has developed or acquired over the years). Debian + Ubuntu are no replacements for CentOS/RHEL, IMO. They are something different.