4 ms·
Unfortunate, but then the question becomes, is a slightly different version of RHEL really needed ? It would make sense for everyone in the RH v/s everyone camp
by bubblethink 3y ago
Unfortunate, but then the question becomes, is a slightly different version of RHEL really needed ? It would make sense for everyone in the RH v/s everyone camp to band together and do one distro instead of everyone creating slightly different versions of RHEL.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- shawnz 3y agoWhy does this announcement make that question any more relevant than it already was a year ago for example? Regardless, I think the answer is basically that you'd face an "xkcd 927" (i.e. "15 competing standards") problem
- LeFantome 3y agoUntil recently, Alma was exactly RHEL but for free. Now they will be CentOS which is already free. I think it is a fair question if the new model adds value or not.
- shawnz 3y agoBut even before this, Alma was using the same model as Rocky, Oracle, etc, weren't they?
- diffeomorphism 3y agoAnd they are stopping this now. That is the question. Not "why do you need a RHEL copy?" (which you could have asked a year ago) but "why do you need a RHEL mostly but not quite copy?"
- shawnz 3y agoRight, and surely there's strictly more value in having a slightly different copy of RHEL than an identical copy of Rocky etc, since now there are strictly more use cases that are being addressed?
- diffeomorphism 3y agoSurely not. You now have much less supply for a common use case, but additional supply for a "new one".