> On Jun 17, 2020, at 9:10 AM, Alessandro Baggi <alessandro.baggi at gmail.com> wrote: > > > Il 17/06/20 15:42, Scott Robbins ha scritto: >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:23:36PM +0100, Pete Biggs wrote: >>> >>>> About Oracle as alternative. Oracle Linux is not an alternative to >>>> CentOS but for RHEL and if I will force to pay for enteprise system >>>> currently I will pay RHEL, not OL. Over this, OL is not the only >>>> enterprise distro that a "user" could choose. If support is needed there >>>> are SUSE (SLES) and Ubuntu. For who that don't need support there are >>>> Debian, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE (I'm talking about the most used but you know >>>> that slackware,FreeBSD are in that list), so many alternatives are in place. >>> >>> I think it's particularly disappointing *if* this is a "policy" from RH >>> since the other major RHEL clone, Scientific Linux, has not produced an >>> EL8 offering in favour of using CentOS. >> Keep in mind that as soon as Scientific Linux started taking off, IIRC, >> because CentOS was late with a release, RH quickly hired its main >> developer. I don't think we can really expect RH to act differently than >> most corporations. > > Yes but today Scientific Linux is out of games and CERN made CentOS CERN based on C8 so there is no more a valid competitor for this target (in the RH family based distro) > “Scientific” linux, with all due respect to one of US national laboratories situated nearby that fathered it, was never viable from the long term use standpoint system in my book. I got experimental proof about 5 or 6 years ago when “Scientific” linux (no, I’m not misplacing the second quote mark ;-) didn’t release updates for some 6 Months at least. I am more unimpressed by CERN’s nearsightness, than I am impressed by my own long term predictive power. The thruth is: “Scientific” linux is the creature of small team, situated in one place, and those who put it together have primamry dedication to their job place, NOT the the “scientific” linux project and its existense. And I am not mentioning what I was mentioning to my researchers when they asked to install “scientific” linux, and I was giving them a list of arguments why they will be better off with CentOS - in addition to the above, CentOS is much reacher without extra repositories (which when there is large enogh number tend to create mess for you). Just my 2 cents. Valeri > > CentOS at the current status (third 8 release) is not suitable for production with the current issues and we are forced to buy rhel license (and every needed extension). > > I would to know what think all ISPs that offer centos 8 on their VPS, Dedicated Server, Shared Hosting and how they handle this problem (probably they don't because the choice is on the customer but maybe...) > > As you said, probably nothing will change for the corporation "limit" concept but at this point, probably, many users will migrate to another platform with less limitation. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos