5 ms·

Stream is inherently less well-tested than the normal stable releases. I'm not aware of any specific bugs that have come up in it, but it get updates before red

Stream is inherently less well-tested than the normal stable releases. I'm not aware of any specific bugs that have come up in it, but it get updates before red hat is willing to push those updates to people who have a support contract. Stream also notably has a much shorter lifecycle, with support for 8 Stream ending in 2024, compared to 2029 for rhel/rocky/alma. To me the main value of using rhel-based distros is the great reliability and long support life. Stream compromises on both of those compared to what normal centos offered, and rocky and alma currently offer.

christophilus 4y ago
I don't think Stream compromises in any significant way on reliability. They test it rigorously. The short support window is a bit of a bummer, though. That said, I'm running CentOS Stream 9 right now. It's supported until 2027. I generally like to keep my operating systems relatively up to date, so a roughly 5 year support window is adequate for me.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mekster 4y ago
  5 years sounds good enough. Ubuntu does that too with LTS unless you go extended 10 years support. People freaking out because their free candy is no longer as tasty as one could hope, it looks quite funny they have zero willingness to pay for such a long support effort.
drewlander 4y ago
The shorter lifecycle is only for 8. CentOS Stream 9 is EOL the same time as RHEL 9 full support page (unless I am reading it wrong) https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/ https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/
- j33zusjuice 4y ago
  You are. The charts are confusing. At the bottom it says full support ends May 31, 2027. Red Hat made some strange decisions with the way they’re handling Stream vs RHEL, plus the communication was abysmal, and they changed models mid-cycle. Be mad at them for that all you want, the rest was overblown. This company could have just used Stream 9 if he wanted a free OS. Since he’s virtualizing, he could have bought hypervisor licenses for $4k a piece that allow you to run as many VMs as your hypervisor can handle. He could have used OpenShift for virtualization and container orchestration, and just paid for the OpenShift licensing. If you use OpenShift, you can run all the RHEL VMs and UBIs you’d like at no extra cost. What you never do is pay per core. There isn’t a single licensing model from RH that forces you to do that. If you license individually, each license supports one bare metal machine, or two VMs. This guy is full of shit. He’s just mad everything isn’t $0.
dralley 4y ago
Every package that gets pushed into Stream has gone through the entire QA process for being included in RHEL. While it is of course possible that problems could be noticed later on, it's not all that likely.

christophilus 4y ago

I don't think Stream compromises in any significant way on reliability. They test it rigorously. The short support window is a bit of a bummer, though. That said, I'm running CentOS Stream 9 right now. It's supported until 2027. I generally like to keep my operating systems relatively up to date, so a roughly 5 year support window is adequate for me.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mekster 4y ago
5 years sounds good enough. Ubuntu does that too with LTS unless you go extended 10 years support. People freaking out because their free candy is no longer as tasty as one could hope, it looks quite funny they have zero willingness to pay for such a long support effort.

drewlander 4y ago

The shorter lifecycle is only for 8. CentOS Stream 9 is EOL the same time as RHEL 9 full support page (unless I am reading it wrong) https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/ https://www.centos.org/centos-stream/

j33zusjuice 4y ago
You are. The charts are confusing. At the bottom it says full support ends May 31, 2027. Red Hat made some strange decisions with the way they’re handling Stream vs RHEL, plus the communication was abysmal, and they changed models mid-cycle. Be mad at them for that all you want, the rest was overblown. This company could have just used Stream 9 if he wanted a free OS. Since he’s virtualizing, he could have bought hypervisor licenses for $4k a piece that allow you to run as many VMs as your hypervisor can handle. He could have used OpenShift for virtualization and container orchestration, and just paid for the OpenShift licensing. If you use OpenShift, you can run all the RHEL VMs and UBIs you’d like at no extra cost. What you never do is pay per core. There isn’t a single licensing model from RH that forces you to do that. If you license individually, each license supports one bare metal machine, or two VMs. This guy is full of shit. He’s just mad everything isn’t $0.

dralley 4y ago

Every package that gets pushed into Stream has gone through the entire QA process for being included in RHEL. While it is of course possible that problems could be noticed later on, it's not all that likely.