CentOS - Dec 2020 - [CentOS-devel] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

> Am 08.12.2020 um 15:32 schrieb Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at
cfa.harvard.edu>:
> 
> This is really, really bad for the majority of us using CentOS.
> 


Of course it is.

> Is there any way we can lobby for the reversal of this decision? Remember
> that the -devel mailing list, and IRC channels *do not* represent the vast
> majority of CentOS users. Most of us are just sysadmins trying to keep our
> systems that have been using CentOS for many, many years running and our
> procedures for installing, and patching systems working after whatever
> changes have been mysteriously decided upon, and forced on us.
> 
> We will be forced to look at other distributions now; and forced to do a
> ton of unnecessary work to deal with this.


The reality is that it was always on borrowed time.

Getting RHEL without paying for it and with slight delays in updates (most
people don?t even update that often anyway) wasn?t going to be sustainable,
ever.

If your business case resolves around being able to freeload on the work of
others, then there?s a serious problem with the business case.

And I say that as somebody who has installed a large portion of the CentOS8 (and
7) servers at work.

Not sure what we ourselves are going to do about it, though.

I would hate to switch to Ubuntu for the stuff I like CentOS most for (for some,
it?s arguably not the greatest distro).

We might end up licensing RHEL for that - and the rest maybe Fedora.

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 9:42 AM Rainer Duffner <rainer at ultra-secure.de>
wrote:
>
>
> > Am 08.12.2020 um 15:32 schrieb Phelps, Matthew <mphelps at
cfa.harvard.edu
> >:
> >
> > This is really, really bad for the majority of us using CentOS.
> >
>
>
>
> Of course it is.
>
>
> > Is there any way we can lobby for the reversal of this decision?
Remember
> > that the -devel mailing list, and IRC channels *do not* represent the
> vast
> > majority of CentOS users. Most of us are just sysadmins trying to keep
> our
> > systems that have been using CentOS for many, many years running and
our
> > procedures for installing, and patching systems working after whatever
> > changes have been mysteriously decided upon, and forced on us.
> >
> > We will be forced to look at other distributions now; and forced to do
a
> > ton of unnecessary work to deal with this.
>
>
>
> The reality is that it was always on borrowed time.
>
> Getting RHEL without paying for it and with slight delays in updates (most
> people don?t even update that often anyway) wasn?t going to be sustainable,
> ever.
>
> If your business case resolves around being able to freeload on the work
> of others, then there?s a serious problem with the business case.
>

I DO NOT WORK FOR A BUSINESS!! (Yes, I'm yelling. Sorry, but I am well and
truly pissed off!) We have no budget for RHEL.


>
> And I say that as somebody who has installed a large portion of the
> CentOS8 (and 7) servers at work.
>
> Not sure what we ourselves are going to do about it, though.
>
> I would hate to switch to Ubuntu for the stuff I like CentOS most for (for
> some, it?s arguably not the greatest distro).
>
> We might end up licensing RHEL for that - and the rest maybe Fedora.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphelps at cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook <http://cfa.harvard.edu/facebook> | Twitter
<http://cfa.harvard.edu/twitter> | YouTube
<http://cfa.harvard.edu/youtube>
| Newsletter <http://cfa.harvard.edu/newsletter>

+++ Rainer Duffner [2020-12-08 15:42:20]:
> If your business case resolves around being able to freeload on the work of
> others, then there?s a serious problem with the business case.
That applies to IBM/RHEL too. They aren't paying for every bit of
software that is packaged in the distribution.

So they can't use that argument against others.

Also people who are currently not paying are not going to suddenly start
paying for RHEL subscriptions. 

A non-paying CentOS user is not a real loss for RHEL. But people dumping
CentOS for a non-RHEL clone is definitely going to impact their future
revenues as they are losing mindshare/goodwill/easy migration etc.

Regards,

Kingsly

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Kingsly At Users Dot SourceForge Dot Net  -- http://kingsly.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20201209/1a0cc495/attachment-0004.sig>

On 09/12/2020 07:16, Kingsly John wrote:
>
> A non-paying CentOS user is not a real loss for RHEL. But people dumping
> CentOS for a non-RHEL clone is definitely going to impact their future
> revenues as they are losing mindshare/goodwill/easy migration etc.
And worse: Without CentOS being used widely (junior) admins will have 
even less experience dealing with RHEL. This will result in lower 
quality deployments of RHEL, reducing overall security of those systems 
and it will reduce RHEL adoption, hitting RH/IBM where it hurts them most.

I am seeing this in practice already with juniors - they all use Ubuntu 
on their personal systems and they hate having to deal with RHEL. And 
their opinions matter in the long run.


peter