AlmaLinux No Longer Aims For 1:1 Compatibility With RHEL

[novideo]

I think CentOS Stream isn't just another option, it's by far the most likely option if Oracle doesn't fork and go independent.



It seems far more likely (and logical) that they scoop up a few dozen RHEL developers and aim to take the fight to IBM. The Oracle-IBM beef goes way back to the early days of Oracle DB and IBM DB2 competing on IBM mainframes. All that big iron is rusting (while IBM keeps its lights on by selling support for it) but this is a blood feud that might not be on the radar of the younger generations.

Right, that is the most likely outcome, I just wish someone beside Canonical and Astra would invest in Debian.

[tildearrow]

It seems that phoronix message moderation got it’s playbook from Chinese censorship. Do you mind explaining Why my post wasnt approved ? No curse words,no hate speech .

Double standard in all its glory. Its okay to bad mouth others ,but not the american dictatorship ? If you have any decency,Mr moderator , explain your actions .

The automatic moderation system takes effect during the first 5 posts a user makes.

[novideo]

3) I can separate Linux use from the GPL. There's no question I despise the GPL, but there are a number of Linux based distros that i think are on the right track but I do think the GPL has hurt the Linux ecosystem way more than it ever helped.

Hating the GPL more than proprietary licenses that give you less rights is bizarre...if GPL really hurt the ecosystem, how did Linux go from one man hobby project to dominating the world, except the desktop, and BSD went from widely adopted to dominated by GNU+Linux?

[panikal]

Hating the GPL more than proprietary licenses that give you less rights is bizarre...

That's not true - GPL removes rights and restricts freedoms of *individuals* while simultaneously ensuring freedom of access for all. An MIT/BSD style license gives you the freedom to do whatever you damn well please, including modifying and hiding the changes while redistributing binaries - GPL takes away that right.

I'm all for GPL and <3 open source but lets not be disingenuous about the intentions of the GPL...people who want to hide their changes and/or make money off those changes find their rights are heavily restricted by the GPL. (I think its most people you find on forums who hate on GPL that are in this category..)

[novideo]

That's not true - GPL removes rights and restricts freedoms of *individuals* while simultaneously ensuring freedom of access for all. An MIT/BSD style license gives you the freedom to do whatever you damn well please, including modifying and hiding the changes while redistributing binaries - GPL takes away that right.

I'm all for GPL and <3 open source but lets not be disingenuous about the intentions of the GPL...people who want to hide their changes and/or make money off those changes find their rights are heavily restricted by the GPL. (I think its most people you find on forums who hate on GPL that are in this category..)

I never said anything about MIT/BSD, I only mentioned proprietary licenses. It doesn't make any sense to argue releasing your source code under the GPL is somehow worse than not releasing your source code at all.

[poncho524]

did you just call alma of all people a leech? Alma and oracle are very active contributors to the rhel and linux ecosystem at large, people can hate on them all they like, but oracle especially, linux would be in a far worse state, and this includes rhel, without oracle, and alma have been good contributors to the larger rhel ecosystem.

Says who? Alma's faq pretty much says "if you found a bug, go file it w red hat"

[poncho524]

I find it a little bit sad that newbies feel that people shouldn't be able to repackage Red Hat's work without giving a second thought to the fact that Red Hat repackages *everyone's* work. That is literally what the RHEL product is. A distribution of open-source (OUR!) work. I find this train of thought a little insulting to the wider open-source community who has designed and developed the majority of your software for them. Not companies like Red Hat.

Sorry, but it sounds like you're the newbie here. People who have been around a long time appreciate all the work RH has contributed to the entire ecosystem. And we also appreciate that they've been able to do so because they have a business which employs a whole ton of people that do nothing but add value to the Linux community. We also appreciate that if this business is undercut by leeches, then the money to pay their pool of contributors will dry up.

Tell me, would Linux be better or worse off wo RH?

[poncho524]

and with a single decision, the installed userbase of RHEL shrinks faster than windows 8 when windows 8.1 was released.

No, actual RHEL users are just fine.

[Crocodilus]

The automatic moderation system takes effect during the first 5 posts a user makes.

Thanks , I stand corrected .

[Quackdoc]

nice bait and switch. an epel contributor does something, and just because they are also working on alma doesn't give alma project credit for the work. whatever value inside alma is 100% created by redhat and upstream. all alma does is give it out there, and host a couple mailing lists.

I am willing to admit that event this might not go down to IBM's benefit, but I think this idea that the community can build or maintain an enterprise distro is foolish.

again even if that WAS the case in which I highly disagree with alma can be credited with expanding platform support which as I said, RHEL explicitly does not consider a leech. address that.