CentOS 8 Ending Next Year To Focus Shift On CentOS Stream

[Sonadow]

I'd rather run CentOS Stream over RHEL because I have a desktop and desktops need to be as up to date as possible. Servers, OTOH, are usually headless and don't normally need all the bleeding edge features. As long as a server is new/good enough to run something newer/better in a VM or container then it's good enough. Just different solutions for different use cases.

I assume they'd rather people use the free RHEL releases and have communities around RHEL versus having multiple (redundant) RHEL and CentOS communities talking about the same things and creating unnecessary community fragmentation.

Stream is not going to be anywhere as up to date as Fedora or any desktop-oriented distributions.

If Stream is simply going to be an early release of RHEL X.x + 1 minor release, then its packages will be just as ancient as RHEL. The package updates in RHEL's minor releases are so insignificant they aren't worthy of mention.

[Sonadow]

I didn't claim it wasn't, what I did claim is that adopting a rolling release format -would- in fact improve stability and eliminate distro fragmentation.

I wasn't referring to you...

[Mark625]

What a load of crap. CentOS was not created to be a beta version of Redhat. It's sole purpose was to be a true open-source clone of Redhat Linux with full binary compatibility, and without all the trademark restrictions.

We all knew this was coming when Redhat took over CentOS, in spite of all their denials of ulterior motives at the time.

Everyone who is currently using CentOS so they can be beta testers for Redhat, please raise your hands. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Didn't think so.

[skeevy420]

Stream is not going to be anywhere as up to date as Fedora or any desktop-oriented distributions.

If Stream is simply going to be an early release of RHEL X.x + 1 minor release, then its packages will be just as ancient as RHEL. The package updates in RHEL's minor releases are so insignificant they aren't worthy of mention.

I agree, but it's a decent middle-ground for when you don't want to move too fast, Fedora, while still wanting a (home) system to keep on top of what will be effecting your production environment in the near future.

[Terr-E]

We all knew this was coming when Redhat took over CentOS, in spite of all their denials of ulterior motives at the time.

I wonder though if this is because RedHat took over CentOS or because IBM took over RedHat…

[smotad]

I bet the people behind Scientific Linux are starting to regret the decision to stop development/repackaging in favour of CentOS.
Somehow I am doubtful that commercial/third party scientific software will run (or be supported) on Stream.

[matsukan]

Kindly annoying .. There are real business needs for free rpm distribution and now Red Had is taking big step to ditch CentOS to graveyard. Ok, Red Hat hopes that no one are taking leftovers I hope that there is already someone planning to take back in control... Time to fork CentOS.

[DKJones]

No words. I think that this is (yet another) big mistake by RedHat/CentOS.

I agree that this is a mistake, but I would be interested to know what other mistakes you think they've made?

[DKJones]

So, obviously doesn't make sense.

1. IBM culture affecting Red Hat?
2. Fedora's choice of Btrfs (also a mistake, btw) causing this?
3. Self destruction?

1. Probably.
2. Btrfs runs fine on Fedora now.
3. Quite possibly.

[kylew77]

This is devastating. The company I work for is just starting to transition from CentOS 6 to 7 and now has no upgrade path from 7. We move very slowly so need 10 to 15 years of support. It will be curious to see what management does in light of this decision.