CentOS Stream Announced As Developer-Forward Distribution, Rolling Release Of RHEL

[szymon_g]

A rolling release of CentOS makes about as much sense as a rolling release of Debian Stable or Arch LTS. They're two opposing concepts.

not necessiraly. the base system can be stable(-ish), the more consumer-facing apps can be updated more often.
i wonder how stable it will be for a normal user, who doesn't necessiraly needs rock-solid stability but also needs new applications.

//// edit
I really do need to read all comments before posting

[torsionbar28]

The name sounds like a weather phenomenon.

Clearly this is proof that climate change is real. Because science.

[You-]

I suspect Centos Stream will be upstream of RHEL (which itself is upstream of Centos) but downstream of Fedora.

I wonder where this fits into getting Fedora/RHEL packaged up for OEM use - previously it was the short Fedora release cycle that was holding that up. I wonder if Centos Stream will be considered a good middle ground.

[DanL]

A rolling release of CentOS makes about as much sense as a rolling release of Debian Stable

The rolling version of Debian stable is Debian testing, which gets frozen periodically to make a stable release. You don't really understand how it works, do you?

[MadeUpName]

Redhat currently has a sea of odd branched weirdness. PHP would be a good example. I think they have 4 different major versions available because no sane person could stick with the lack of security and flakeyness of the version of PHP originally released on RH7. The streams release seems like a reasonable way to get around that. If you are a phone company and have to be up 24x7x365 and have proprietary stuff that never gets updates you can go with the standard release. If you are a web site and most of your apps come from your own development the rolling relase makes sense.

In my case I I dual boot into Centos to run Davinci Resolve. I will go with the standard release because I know that is what Black Magic will be targeting. But if I build another server for myself I will go with the rolling release.

[SyXbiT]

The streams release seems like a reasonable way to get around that. If you are a phone company and have to be up 24x7x365 and have proprietary stuff that never gets updates you can go with the standard release. If you are a web site and most of your apps come from your own development the rolling relase makes sense.

But if you are a website, and most of your apps come from your own development, what does CentOS Stream really provide over regular CentOS?

[Guest]

A new rolling release distro is always great.

[RahulSundaram]

But if you are a website, and most of your apps come from your own development, what does CentOS Stream really provide over regular CentOS?

Faster access to newer packages. Whether that is useful to you depends on which infrastructure packages you use to develop said website in your example

[alcalde]

The rolling version of Debian stable is Debian testing, which gets frozen periodically to make a stable release. You don't really understand how it works, do you?

I think you didn't understand my point. Debian stable is supposed to be... stable. Debian testing is not. CentOS is supposed to be stable, as RHEL is. Saying you're making a rolling stable distribution is a contradiction in terms.

[wizard69]

A new rolling release distro is always great.

Not really! Especially one that sounds like it will be as unstable as hell. Now a rolling release that offered up sound upgrades and bug fixes would be great but that means well tested releases. The way this sounds in the article you could be getting several updates a day for the same application. Some may like that in a rolling release but I don’t.

im looking for a rolling release that reduces the need to install a new distro for every major upgrade. Frankly it needs to do so without constant breakage. I’d like to go two years between major distro reinstalls. Frankly Rawhide is an example of exactly what I don’t want in a distro (at least on a laptop).