OpenELA Publishes Initial Source Code For Building RHEL Derivatives

[cynic]

when Red Hat wanted to standardize Linux distros even those distros from different families

how is redhat saying other distros what to do?

they just do their distro, and that's it.

please stop this nonsense about RH pushing/forcing/deciding for other distros.

[logical]

So basically they created a 501(c)(6) Delaware non-profit corporation so they can steal Red Hat's work, is that about the gist of it?

To me, this represents the absolute worst of open source.

If i was on the steering committee, I would, pardon the pun, steer them towards a different tact.

Since the group does represent significant amounts of experience, and they seem to have a bug up their ass about Red Hat, why not do one better and fork Fedora?

Fedora and Red Hat are pretty much the same code base, and Fedora is one of the better distros, probably top 4, why not fork it and base their product of of that?

Even better, since SUSE is part of this group, why not help Rocky, Oracle, Alma and anyone else to create a fork of SLED?

Of course we know the answer to this last question, because SUSE knows that would kill its business and while they have no problem with trying to screw over Red Hat they don't want to screw themselves.

And who can blame them?

Have you seen them?

Steal? Really? What an utterly ridiculous notion. It is not possible to steal software licensed to be freely distributable. If anything, it is Redhat trying to "steal" by placing additional restrictions outside of the software itself. Red Hat came about by making use of the licensed work of others, packaging it, and making a product to sell. This is something that they still do.

I've been using RedHat since long before the enterprise versions ever existed. I used to buy the boxed just to support them. I find this new stance of theirs simply disgusting.

[cjcox]

So basically they created a 501(c)(6) Delaware non-profit corporation so they can steal Red Hat's work, is that about the gist of it?

No. However, Red Hat pulled repo access to GPL changes made by the community at large, because the changes belong to Red Hat.

[Brittle2]

Hahaha, best moment to live in a Deb, Gentoo world. First systemd, when Red Hat wanted to standardize Linux distros even those distros from different families, but they didn't think the first thing they should do was to keep themselves alive first. Second, they were bought by IBM. And now because they are failing, they tried to "close" the source code. The company who always tried to dictate things to the community is struggling for life. I can just laugh. Red Hat is dying alone.

no?, also your drivers and the most the tecnology that made linux usable today was made by redhat, so drivers, dbus, systemd, mesa, kernel fixes, etc, you can hate then how much you want(and i gonna agree with modt of it) but linux is where it's today because of red hat, and them open sourcing their stuff

[Duve]

No. However, Red Hat pulled repo access to GPL changes made by the community at large, because the changes belong to Red Hat.

When that access was in CentOS Stream? Ok, fine.

[jacob]

My goodness gracious.

Just run Arch or one of its derivatives and do away with all this nonsense.

If you want open source then use freely available open source programs, not "open source" buried behind a paywall and plethora of other obstacles.

And if you like and/or benefit from the programs donate to its authors.

It's not rocket science.

Sheesh.

Arch is a nice distro with important use cases, but when you need an OS to run enterprise software on it's one if the worst options possible.

[cjcox]

When that access was in CentOS Stream? Ok, fine.

I think you missed my "humor". It was in response that somehow we're talking about code that belongs to Red Hat, when in fact, the code changes were likely made by non Red Hat folks to GPL code. Maybe.... (perhaps not) you can extrapolate the rest from that.

[anarki2]

I still don't see a reason for this to exist other than to be a leech. CentOS Stream offers ABI compatibility (because RHEL between minor releases generally does).

Alma Linux imo went the correct route with this, being based off Stream which allows contributors to more easily contribute upstream like they already have done. Oracle, Rocky and SUSE just want to have their cake and eat it too.

Stream is unfit for production systems.

[anarki2]

My goodness gracious.

Just run Arch or one of its derivatives and do away with all this nonsense.

If you want open source then use freely available open source programs, not "open source" buried behind a paywall and plethora of other obstacles.

And if you like and/or benefit from the programs donate to its authors.

It's not rocket science.

Sheesh.

Yeah, Arch must be great if you're a bored geek that just cannot wait to fix today's breakages, but not much if you're a sysadmin, where breaks happen even if you're on a useless distro.

[mSparks]

So basically they created a 501(c)(6) Delaware non-profit corporation so they can steal Red Hat's work, is that about the gist of it?

Quite the opposite.
Redhat deleted their open source repositories and started pirating the entire linux communities work.

So the community forked what they have done and made new repos, since there isn't much anyone can do about redhat becoming software pirates other than not give them money.

openELA is the new unified codebase for enterprise linux developers. (will likely ship on new servers such as those from Dell, HP, Intel, AMD, Nvidia et al probably end of next year imho)

The future of Redhat is IBM mainframes and not much if anything else.