On 12/14/20 4:09 PM, Konstantin Boyandin via CentOS wrote: > On 14.12.2020 21:41, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: >> Le 14/12/2020 à 15:25, James Pearson a écrit : >>> As others have said, it misses the _really_ important bit about the >>> traditional CentOS model which is to follow the RHEL ~10 year life cycle >> >> I totally agree with you. >> >> But when you disagree with someone (e.g. the CentOS team), it's good at > least >> to hear the person out. >> >> Back at the university here in Montpellier, we had a funny exercise in one > of >> the courses. Every one of us had to pick a subject where he or she had a > strong >> position. I remember I chose nuclear energy, which I think is a bad > choice. And >> in the exercise, I had to *defend* nuclear energy against its opponents. >> >> And I published the link to the article because it's a fine text and > nicely >> argumented. > > Well, it's mostly emotional (the leitmotif: "how can you say CentOS > Stream is bad if you didn't try it?"). And the author's bio spoils the > fun, as well: > > "Ben Porter is a Linux and open source advocate, currently working as an > OpenShift consultant for Red Hat." > > And the comments to the graphs, where RHEL, CentOS and Fedora are placed > on a line, are simply ridiculous (such as "did you use to consider RHEL > to be the CentOS beta?"). With all due respect to Ben Porter, it didn't > convince me. > I have posted a comment that explains why and on which topic he is wrong. You post them and I will debunk them :-) -- Ljubomir Ljubojevic (Love is in the Air) PL Computers Serbia, Europe StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant