.
.
.
%<
>
> CentOS has *never* had support from Red Hat.? If you want to run a
> stable, supported production environment while you complete testing of
> a new minor release, you can get that from RHEL but not CentOS.? If
> you want to apply only security updates to a production environment to
> reduce risk (in the sense of both security and stability risks), you
> can get that from RHEL but not CentOS.? If you want to call an
> engineer for support when you have a problem in production, you can
> get that from RHEL, but not CentOS.
So what is it you expect?, get an enterprise quality OS for free, and
also expect highly paid, expensive, engineers to support your need for
assistance on a whim for free too? Of course RHEL is very good at
supporting their distros/releases, I use it often enough, because it is
paid for (by my employer). You get what you pay for, and I have the
impression that you using Centos and the support you DID get, probably
didn't cost you a penny. I used both for the longest while, RHEL at
work, Centos at home. Centos, as the (free) RHEL 'twin', is going away,
so be it. Now I switched to RHEL both at home and of course still at
work, RHEL even supports that, both.
>
> So, I will agree with you on one point: Support is the thing that
> makes RHEL valuable.? The product is excellent, but it's not the
> product that Red Hat's really selling, it's the support.? It's
the
> things that their engineers do so that you don't have to, as their
> customer.? And CentOS has never offered that.
>
> Of course, you can fill some of those gaps with your own engineering,
> but if you're filling those gaps with local engineering today, you
> should be able to fill them using Stream, too.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos