Matthew Miller: >> why don't they just make RHEL available to all for 'free', and you just >> pay for support if you need it - i.e. a bit like it is now, RHEL if you >> pay, CentOS if you don't - I'm sure that would make everyone happy :-) > > Because RHEL's value proposition is not merely support, and the value of > subscription goes way beyond that. > > Butttttt, that said: yes, this really is the direction things are going with > expanded access to low-cost/no-cost RHEL. It that is really the case, then maybe some one from Redhat should pipe up now ... If there is going to be a no-cost RHEL that can be used in the same way as CentOS is used now, then I think that would solve all the problems with this CentOS Stream announcement ... and calm down things James Pearson