Am 11.12.20 um 09:23 schrieb Gordon Messmer: > On 12/10/20 6:28 PM, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS wrote: >> Allow me to disagree. We both trust Chris Wright's words, don't we? CTO >> won't lie. Citing him: >> >> "To be exact, CentOS Stream is an upstream development platform for >> ecosystem developers. It will be updated several times a day. > > So, like Fedora? People run servers on Fedora now, and I think that's > fine. > >> This is not a production operating system." > > > Does he say that CentOS is a production operating system? > > As far as I know, Red Hat has never endorsed running CentOS in > production, so I don't understand why it's significant that they also > don't endorse running CentOS Stream in production. > > >> And even if I reduce the number of CentOS Stream upgrades to >> minimal one, the base advantage of CentOS is lost: predictability. > > > It's really difficult for me to look at a distribution that just stops > getting updates for 4-6 weeks, twice a year, and use the word > "predictable" to describe it. To be honest, such argumentation is pointless because anyone knowns that grey shades in beetween exits. CentOS Linux was more on the bright side, then Centos Stream will be (in terms of current usage scenarios). > My first reaction to the announcement was pretty negative, too. But when > I stepped back and looked at the current situation *real* honestly, I > had to admit that CentOS just doesn't offer any of the things that > people are complaining about losing. > > And I hope that the CentOS maintainers don't interpret that as > criticism, because it isn't intended to be. They've always maintained > that if you need updates/patches in a timely manner, then you should be > paying Red Hat for RHEL. I agreed with them then, and I still do. > I think a main point(s) at this all is the timing (communication)! -- Leon