4 ms·

I don't get what's the big deal--essentially the only thing being lost is a pointer to commit that marks the difference between RHEL X.Y and X.Y+1..?

marwatk 3y ago
RedHat spends a lot of time back-porting security updates to older software (e.g. RHEL7). Stream is always only the latest RHEL version, I believe. The whole point of RHEL is the long term support (the back-porting), which is what they're going to stop publishing.
- trufas 3y ago
  CentOS 7 is supported and will be EOL at the same time as RHEL 7. Stream does have major versions so you can continue to use CentOS Stream 8 and get backports. You only lose anything if you're tied to some minor version of EL for some reason.
pavon 3y ago
RHEL X.Y isn't a simple snapshot of CentOS Stream X at a specific point. It is a fork of CentOS Stream, with cherry-picks and so on. The specific details of what patches made it into RHEL and when and how to create reproducible builds are now only being provided to customers. In the past, customers have been able to redistribute the RHEL repos freely. I assume that will remain the case as long as CentOS Stream is open source. Edit: Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if IBM put some content in the RHEL repo that is under restrictive licenses that couldn't be redistributed just to complicate things, but all the important parts will remain open source, due to close ties to CentOS Stream and Fedora. Rocky/Alma already have to replace trademarks, and this wouldn't be much different, but they would have to obtain access to the repos as customers themselves, or have another customer strip the bad stuff out before throwing it over the fence. We'll have to see how hostile they want to be about it.
- mroche 3y ago
  > In the past, customers have been able to redistribute the RHEL repos freely. I assume that will remain the case as long as CentOS Stream is open source. There's a duality here. Yes, by the nature of the distribution, GPL, and licensing general, Red Hat cannot stop or prevent a customer from distributing RHEL packages and software to third parties. However, Red Hat reserves the right to terminate any existing subscriptions a customer may have as a result of their package distributing. IIRC, the Enterprise Agreement makes it pretty clear the services and offerings provided by the subscription are for the customer and the customer only. Going outside of that violates the subscription's terms, not the softwares' licenses, therefore allowing Red Hat to end business with said customer. For those concerned about the final year of CentOS 7: it will not be touched. It will continue to see source exports to git.centos.org as there is no parallel CentOS Stream 7 platform. Also, git.centos.org is not EOL either because it is used by other groups than Red Hat, like CentOS Special Interest Groups.
  - Phrodo_00 3y ago
    > Red Hat cannot stop or prevent a customer from distributing RHEL packages and software to third parties. However, Red Hat reserves the right to terminate any existing subscriptions a customer may have as a result of their package distributing. IANAL, but not so sure about that. From GPLv3: > You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it. That sounds like a further restriction.
    - 0x0000000 3y ago
      Linux is GPLv2, not Linux GPLv3. V2 does have a similar line in it: > You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. But I expect we'd have to see litigation to determine how broadly that can be interpreted. Is applying a consequence as a result of an action the same as restricting that action?

marwatk 3y ago

RedHat spends a lot of time back-porting security updates to older software (e.g. RHEL7). Stream is always only the latest RHEL version, I believe. The whole point of RHEL is the long term support (the back-porting), which is what they're going to stop publishing.

trufas 3y ago
CentOS 7 is supported and will be EOL at the same time as RHEL 7. Stream does have major versions so you can continue to use CentOS Stream 8 and get backports. You only lose anything if you're tied to some minor version of EL for some reason.

pavon 3y ago

RHEL X.Y isn't a simple snapshot of CentOS Stream X at a specific point. It is a fork of CentOS Stream, with cherry-picks and so on. The specific details of what patches made it into RHEL and when and how to create reproducible builds are now only being provided to customers. In the past, customers have been able to redistribute the RHEL repos freely. I assume that will remain the case as long as CentOS Stream is open source. Edit: Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if IBM put some content in the RHEL repo that is under restrictive licenses that couldn't be redistributed just to complicate things, but all the important parts will remain open source, due to close ties to CentOS Stream and Fedora. Rocky/Alma already have to replace trademarks, and this wouldn't be much different, but they would have to obtain access to the repos as customers themselves, or have another customer strip the bad stuff out before throwing it over the fence. We'll have to see how hostile they want to be about it.

mroche 3y ago
> In the past, customers have been able to redistribute the RHEL repos freely. I assume that will remain the case as long as CentOS Stream is open source. There's a duality here. Yes, by the nature of the distribution, GPL, and licensing general, Red Hat cannot stop or prevent a customer from distributing RHEL packages and software to third parties. However, Red Hat reserves the right to terminate any existing subscriptions a customer may have as a result of their package distributing. IIRC, the Enterprise Agreement makes it pretty clear the services and offerings provided by the subscription are for the customer and the customer only. Going outside of that violates the subscription's terms, not the softwares' licenses, therefore allowing Red Hat to end business with said customer. For those concerned about the final year of CentOS 7: it will not be touched. It will continue to see source exports to git.centos.org as there is no parallel CentOS Stream 7 platform. Also, git.centos.org is not EOL either because it is used by other groups than Red Hat, like CentOS Special Interest Groups.
- Phrodo_00 3y ago
  > Red Hat cannot stop or prevent a customer from distributing RHEL packages and software to third parties. However, Red Hat reserves the right to terminate any existing subscriptions a customer may have as a result of their package distributing. IANAL, but not so sure about that. From GPLv3: > You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it. That sounds like a further restriction.
  - 0x0000000 3y ago
    Linux is GPLv2, not Linux GPLv3. V2 does have a similar line in it: > You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. But I expect we'd have to see litigation to determine how broadly that can be interpreted. Is applying a consequence as a result of an action the same as restricting that action?