Red Hat’s commitment to open source: A response to the git.centos.org changes

More about Red Hat's decision to make CentOS Stream the primary repository for RHEL sources.

4 comments

Idk, on the one hand I could see the argument against organizations dodging the Red Hat fees by choosing free downstream, but then again, like, everything that RHEL does was always available? The reason you'd pay is for the support you'd get from them?

To be honest I never really understood why you'd specifically want something like CentOS over say, Debian - I mean, outside of I guess, .rpm packaging?
- I've often seen set ups where Prod is RedHat because support, and Test and Dev environments are CentOS to avoid the fees on less important environments.
So he reckons that without locking out free downstream users, Red Hat would go tits up and the whole Linux ecosystem would fall into the hands of hackers and hobbyists? Fine by me.

I like Jeff Geerling's response:

Red Hat: those who use open source code and don't contribute back are "a real threat to open source companies everywhere"

I call them: users.

I fight for the users.
- I don't like that response at all. Jeff conflating developers and users does nothing to resolve the issues and differences in the RHEL clone community that led to this decision.
  
  I'm going to say it: Jeff is using this issue to increase his social media footprint. I'm bored of his content and he's done NOTHING to help the community figure out a way forward. He's just saying some loud things over and over.