> 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. I think all of us here understand the hugely complex process of producing a quality OS, even when it's "just" a clone of another one. The official sanctioning from RH was touted as a two-way process: community input into RHEL and RH support and help of the cloning and build process. It would be a bit underhand if it turned out that it was RH's way of creating a two tier system: buy RHEL+support and get timely updates; use CentOS for free, get security updates, but wait two months for each upgrade. P.