Jump to content

Red Hat Restricting Source Code to Customers


raymac46

Recommended Posts

V.T. Eric Layton

It may have a detrimental effect on CentOS, an excellent GNU/Linux that I played around with extensively years ago. It was basically the open source version of RedHat, but it's never been a favorite entity of Red Hat corporation. CentOS had many push and pull arguments with Red Hat over the years.

 

https://www.centos.org/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, V.T. Eric Layton said:

It may have a detrimental effect on CentOS,

 

Possibly in the longer term if they close it down further but at the moment it seems to be an extra hoop to jump through.

 

Quote

I

However, the open-source developer GloriousEggroll mentions that the developer subscription to RHEL is free. So, access to RHEL source code is still possible but inconvenient?

Just want to to note here the Developer subscription is completely free and still allows access to RHEL and its source code if you want exact package sources. CentOS stream basically serves as a RHEL upstream so I understand this change. It may seem confusing for some people.

— GloriousEggroll @gloriouseggroll@fosstodon.org (@GloriousEggroll) June 22, 2023

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's complicated. CentOS Stream is now an upstream version of Red Hat so it isn't an absolute clone. The absolute clones of RHEL that are affected include Rocky Linux and Alma Linux. Developers can get a free licence to RHEL's source code but the licence agreement precludes them publishing or sharing it. Both Alma and Rocky have pledged to keep their distros rock stable and secure. Think of it like the early days of PCs where IBM was slightly different than Compaq and DEC machines although they all ran Windows 3.11 OK.

This is more of a problem for big server farms than it is for a desktop user. But I have to say if I were starting up a webserver business today I'd be taking a long look at Debian.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this about source code for RH exclusive packages? I thought GPL mandates making source code available without restriction.

Edit:- maybe so. I reread that link in OP:

Quote

Red Hat announced that CentOS Stream will now be the only repository for RHEL-related source code releases

 

Quote

But I have to say if I were starting up a webserver business today I'd be taking a long look at Debian.

 I knew a guy who was server admin for a large telco which used RHEL. He changed jobs to a major property website which used Debian and said Debian was light years ahead in ease of deployment and management.

  • Like 1
  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

I'm not planning on setting up any servers, but if I were going to, it surely wouldn't be with Debian (because of SystemD). I'd go with one of the most stable GNU/LInux OSes for server applications... Slackware. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, securitybreach said:

I never understood the systemd hatred. I think it works fine.

 

So far for me it seems fairly easy to use. I have made a few hooks and extra service files with no problems. 😎

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, securitybreach said:

 

It's worth reading the linked blog post direct from RH exec - https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes

TL;DR - we are a capitalist megacorporation. Suck it and give us money.

 

I won't disparage RH too much though, they have done a lot for Linux. Personally I have never used any of their products so don't actually care one hoot.

  • Agree 1
  • +1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really one of those billionaires versus millionaires arguments. Red Hat would love to make the rebuilders like Alma Linux go away. They have a beef with the big IT companies who want a line for line compatible RHEL without paying anything for it. If you are a small fry developer or you just want to set up a home server or two, you can get a free RHEL licence, use the distro, get the source code. As far as personal use goes, I have tried out Fedora back when they were one of the few distros supporting a new AMD video card I had. It worked OK.

Edited by raymac46
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/26/2023 at 3:03 PM, securitybreach said:

I never understood the systemd hatred. I think it works fine.

i posted a video about some of the reasons a few months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach
9 hours ago, raymac46 said:

It's really one of those billionaires versus millionaires arguments. Red Hat would love to make the rebuilders like Alma Linux go away. They have a beef with the big IT companies who want a line for line compatible RHEL without paying anything for it. If you are a small fry developer or you just want to set up a home server or two, you can get a free RHEL licence, use the distro, get the source code. As far as personal use goes, I have tried out Fedora back when they were one of the few distros supporting a new AMD video card I had. It worked OK.

 

Yeah but they literally have no choice unless they want to be sued over GPL violations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

securitybreach
3 hours ago, crp said:

i posted a video about some of the reasons a few months ago.

 

Was there a valid issue or just a different way of managing services?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2023 at 8:25 AM, crp said:

i posted a video about some of the reasons a few months ago.

 

Just watched the video. I like his style of presentation and the information was neatly presented. It helped me to understand the differences between the two systems. The concerns raised at the end against systemd are a tad worrying. If it is easy to have logs in plain text then the developers decision to not do so is bizarre. As to the main instigator of systemd now working for Microsoft and also working  on systemd well that is indeed bizarre and very worrying.Overall though I recon systemd's is more flexible and definitely easier for folk to customise to suit. 😎

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hedon James
On 6/27/2023 at 7:57 PM, sunrat said:

 

It's worth reading the linked blog post direct from RH exec - https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes

TL;DR - we are a capitalist megacorporation. Suck it and give us money.

 

I won't disparage RH too much though, they have done a lot for Linux. Personally I have never used any of their products so don't actually care one hoot.

That pretty much sums up my outlook.  Although I would also add that I am reminded of the parable of how the Nazis seized power....paraphrased as follows:

 

When they came for the cobblers, I said nothing, as I already had shoes; when they came for the bakers, I said nothing, as I don't eat cake; .....(and so on, and so on); and when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.

 

It is in THAT respect, that I actually care a LOT!  This seems to be an IBM-driven decision.  RedHat has thrived for YEARS, becoming the first "billion dollar enterprise" in the OpenSource community and is the proof of concept that the value in the software business isn't actually the software, but in the deployment, services, and support.  RH did this while unambiguously complying with the spirit and letter of GPL licensing.  They probably lost some customers to Centos and other clones, but the gains of larger enterprise customers FAR outweighed the losses.  So much so, that IBM thought it was a wise investment to purchase RHEL.  Then, in typical big-corporation fashion, they started to focus inordinately on "patching the leaks in the boat", rather than innovations for the boat's speed and/or maneuverability.  And now they're in a tricky position, which may cost them on BOTH fronts.  In their attempt to "shed free-loaders" and convert them to paying customers, they're just as likely to cause paying customers to leave, and pursue other providers of similar services (SUSE is an obvious choice, as a large corporate-backed provider with RPM compatible tools; with Canonical and Debian also valid contenders).

 

I think the mistake being made here is IBMs to claim.  They're operating as if their users have limited options other than to accept the imposed changes.  But I think they don't understand the very core of linux users.  A collective group who does not like being told how they can & cannot use their computers for productivity, and DESPISES being held hostage to a single entity dictating those terms.  RH just took a step in that direction, and I think it WILL cost them.  Maybe not immediately....but as support contracts reach their anniversary dates, I'd be willing to bet that more contract revenue will be lost to other providers than the "free-loaders" that they're trying to convert.  The risk/reward ratio seems to be dangerously out of whack, IMO.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

V.T. Eric Layton

To put it plainly, my issues with SystemD are because:

 

  • it was unnecessary -> SysVinit worked fine and dandy; using a simple text file for all settings/controls/customizations
  •  it's overly complicated -> violating the KISS fundamentals of UNIX
  • it's system invasive -> meaning it utilizes, controls, manipulates many subsystems of GNU/Linux creating a system wide dependency on Systemd.

 

 

I don't have anything against Lennart Poettering (a Microsoft engineer --formerly of RedHat, who developed SystemD and PulseAudio, which I HATE! He's a very smart fellow... and probably a good guy all 'round. He's not the AntiChrist. Having a degree in Electronic Engineering and having serviced electronics apparatuses for my entire career, I found early on that overly complicated designs are NOT always "improvements"; often, from a repair  point of view, they are a pain in the rectal orifice and create higher costs in the long run for consumers. The simple things are always the best. That's a rule that holds true for most things in life.

 

And I admit that I was a bit suspicious of a Microsoft Engineer piddling around with GNU/Linux and what the ramifications of that would be over time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...