3 ms·

Sounds like they think of Rocky as the enemy, 'under no obligation' to make it easier, 'rebuilding code' is a 'threat'... I have a project in RHEL that they 'r

Sounds like they think of Rocky as the enemy, 'under no obligation' to make it easier, 'rebuilding code' is a 'threat'... I have a project in RHEL that they 'rebuild' but I don't see that as a 'threat'. They want to be a little bit more careful with dogma that makes sense to their management, will get them patted on the head there, but is just nonsense seen from other perspectives - like my perspective contributing to their project for free.

housemusicfan 3y ago
> I have a project in RHEL that they 'rebuild' but I don't see that as a 'threat'. They address that in the blog post: "We don’t simply take upstream packages and rebuild them." Rest assured they're adding good juju to your upstream code! This is 2000s-era Microsoft-level wordsmithing.
- bonzini 3y ago
  It also address in the blog post that all changes go upstream. We could check what Red Hat does if we knew what package is that.
masukomi 3y ago
> I have a project in RHEL that they 'rebuild' but I don't see that as a 'threat'. that's only a relevant statement IF you are trying to make your living off of it and they're rebuilding it without compensating you. they're not saying rebuilding their opensource packages is a threat to the creators. They're saying people freely distributing the things they pay people to make is a threat to their ability to continue to pay people to make it. I don't care if people repackage my open source code because I'm not trying to pay for food and shelter with it. If i was, I'd be screwed because every repackaging would be just giving away my work without compensating me.
- hdjjhhvvhga 3y ago
  But Red Hat was aware of that risk but made the decision to repackage and live off other people's work a few decades ago - and it paid off.
cmiles74 3y ago
I suspect Oracle Linux is the bigger "threat". Oracle uses this distribution all over, perhaps RedHat thinks those are licenses they deserve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Linux https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Linux
geerlingguy 3y ago
They're accidentally leaking their internal marketing texts in the blog post.

housemusicfan 3y ago

> I have a project in RHEL that they 'rebuild' but I don't see that as a 'threat'. They address that in the blog post: "We don’t simply take upstream packages and rebuild them." Rest assured they're adding good juju to your upstream code! This is 2000s-era Microsoft-level wordsmithing.

bonzini 3y ago
It also address in the blog post that all changes go upstream. We could check what Red Hat does if we knew what package is that.

masukomi 3y ago

> I have a project in RHEL that they 'rebuild' but I don't see that as a 'threat'. that's only a relevant statement IF you are trying to make your living off of it and they're rebuilding it without compensating you. they're not saying rebuilding their opensource packages is a threat to the creators. They're saying people freely distributing the things they pay people to make is a threat to their ability to continue to pay people to make it. I don't care if people repackage my open source code because I'm not trying to pay for food and shelter with it. If i was, I'd be screwed because every repackaging would be just giving away my work without compensating me.

hdjjhhvvhga 3y ago
But Red Hat was aware of that risk but made the decision to repackage and live off other people's work a few decades ago - and it paid off.

cmiles74 3y ago

I suspect Oracle Linux is the bigger "threat". Oracle uses this distribution all over, perhaps RedHat thinks those are licenses they deserve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Linux https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Linux

geerlingguy 3y ago

They're accidentally leaking their internal marketing texts in the blog post.