#Verpasstodon

Red Hat vernagelt Zugang zu öffentlichen Repositories – Problem für Klone

Red Hat hat angekündigt, keine öffentlichen Quellen von RHEL mehr anzubieten. Das könnte Klonen wie Alma Linux oder Rocky Linux den Hahn abdrehen.

https://www.heise.de/news/Red-Hat-vernagelt-Zugang-zu-oeffentlichen-Repositories-Problem-fuer-Klone-9194940.html?wt_mc=sm.red.ho.mastodon.mastodon.md_beitraege.md_beitraege

#Klon #LinuxundOpenSource #RedHat #Repositories #centOS #öffentlich

@heiseonline Müsste Linus Torvalds Red Hat die Nutzung seines Kernels nun nicht eigentlich verbieten?

@heiseonline
isn't that somewhat illegal? 🤔

@zem @heiseonline I guess that Is just for their proprietary parts (that are legal) but very good question 😱 #foss #redhat

@zem @heiseonline That has triggered a heated debate on an internal mailing list of the GNU project, and my personal conclusion on the facts that were presented is that yes, this is a GPL violation.

Red Hats business was murky for decades, but there was no obvious violation of the rules. This is the last straw.

@zem @heiseonline

I tried to understand it… as far as I get it:

They publish it all BUT it is not 100% clear what exactly is bundeled into RHEL …. As a result binary compatible builds are either hell of a work but not automatable

@ahoernchen
Soweit ich weiß, muss die Quelle nur zusammen mit der Software verteilt werden. Die Endnutzer von RHEL müssten also weiter eine Kopie des Quellcodes erhalten, alle anderen nicht.

Wenn du auch ein tool nur intern/privat verwendest, das GPL-Code beinhaltet oder modifiziert, dann musst du das auch nicht veröffentlichen.

@eingfoan @zem @heiseonline Basically, you have access to the source if you are a RHEL subscriber, but if you redistribute that source (which GPL explicity allows), you may be in violation of your Red Hat subscription terms, meaning you may get cut off from RHEL and access to those and future sources by extension. Whether or not it's legal is a matter of debate, but definitely a blow to downstream open source projects and their users.

@vwbusguy @eingfoan @zem @heiseonline

I'm not sure if it's better to have something for years, then have it taken away, or to never have it in the first place.

#RedHat seems to be all about clawing back things it has provided previously.

I've said it a few times: Red Hat can do what it wants. Nobody has to like it.

I think RH hoped users would choose #CentOS Stream over #RockyLinux and #AlmaLinux *just because*. Crippling the downstreams is one way to get there ... I guess.

Aside from the ability to contribute, how is Stream better than Alma/Rocky/RHEL?

If Stream is not as good as RHEL for production, at least in some way, how do you *sell* it?

Are there ways that Stream is as good as -- or better than -- RHEL?

@passthejoe @zem @eingfoan @heiseonline At my last job, I had a few cases where RHEL had a bug that impacted workflows, so I installed the patch for it from Stream repos that otherwise wouldn't have hit RHEL for months. Sometimes RHEL is more stable than Stream and sometimes it actually isn't.

@vwbusguy
it al depends on which distribution the software you are working with is integrated best I guess.
@passthejoe @eingfoan @heiseonline