3 ms·
Based on https://openela.org/about/ https://openela.org/about/ this appears to be a source-only distribution. They do not speak of binary builds (just “buildabl
by fweimer 3y ago
Based on https://openela.org/about/ https://openela.org/about/ this appears to be a source-only distribution. They do not speak of binary builds (just “buildable”), that's apparently up to the downstream participants.
- ticviking 3y agoI'm not sure that's a bad thing given that the previous approach was hampered so much by confusion about where the value is. If this is a commitment to a set of source then the players can compete on ease of use, support or other stuff.
- CaliforniaKarl 3y agoRight now I'm thinking about it in the way that I think about Let's Encrypt. Let's Encrypt has their own infrastructure, governance, etc., but I don't use Let's Encrypt products to interact with Let's Encrypt. Instead, I interact with Let's Encrypt via products like Certbot from the EFF. If OpenELA's going to provide source, and I access that source through builds provided by CIQ or SUSE or someone else, then I'll be thinking of it in the same way as I think about Let's Encrypt.
- toyg 3y agoOr java.