5 ms·

This is the guy who kicked up all the dirt about Red Hat, which IMO was entirely overblown. Not to say that he's a bad dude...but be careful of who you listen t

by davisr 3y ago

This is the guy who kicked up all the dirt about Red Hat, which IMO was entirely overblown. Not to say that he's a bad dude...but be careful of who you listen to on the Internet.

sfsdf343425 3y ago
Gotta admit that the writing is very good and his content are entertaining, regardless of the content or (mis)information.
jchw 3y ago
Why do you feel it is particularly overblown?
- emptysongglass 3y ago
  Because so much of it was just completely false. Jeff positioned Red Hat as going against the community, which wasn't the case at all. The "bad actors" were squarely Rocky and Alma who just wanted to sell the exact same ten year support enterprise Red Hat as Red Hat themselves without any work. Well, Red Hat said, you want it, you go get it in Stream, which has a 5 year lifecycle. The only companies that need ten year lifecycles are the same consumers Red Hat caters to with RHEL. Red Hat is continuing to honor all its licensing terms. It just isn't doing its freeloading competitors any favors. And yes: they're freeloaders. Red Hat's choice never touched the community in any way. As a hobbyist who uses Red Hat stuff, I'm not using RHEL, and even if I was, Red Hat gives generous licenses for hobbyists like me. Jeff (and everybody else) jumped on the hate bandwagon. It wasn't kind, it was mob behavior, and it completely lacked any nuance.
  - geerlingguy 3y ago
    That sounds like some great revisionist history. Thousands of sysadmins, open source devs, even Hatters themselves used CentOS as a proxy for RHEL where they didn't want to deal with licensing crap. In the middle of the CentOS 8 lifecycle, they converted CentOS to CentOS Stream (nobody asked for this), forcing everyone who had migrated their tooling and infra from CentOS 7 to 8 to migrate instead to... what? Rocky/Alma stepped in and saved the day for all those folks. Then in the middle of the CentOS Stream 9 lifecycle, they hid some of the sources required for rebuilding a CentOS-equivalent (at least simply/easily) behind a Red Hat account and told the community they should be happy with 16 dev licenses for RHEL if they truly needed RHEL compatibility. As I said then, "no thanks."
    - emptysongglass 3y ago
      Jeff, plenty of smarter people than me came out against you to correct your crusade. As a practicing Christian, I'd expect more from you than coming out to lead a mob frothing at the mouth for blood. You didn't even try and have a reasonable discourse with Red Hatters. As an influencer, you have a responsibility not to encourage this kind of social media vitriol that's become all too common. It's a contagion upon the human mind and you are directly responsible for whipping people up in this one.
      - kelnos 3y ago
        > plenty of smarter people than me came out against you to correct your crusade. Doesn't mean they were right.
      - yipbub 3y ago
        Ex-Redhatter that watched stuff go down while defending it till I stopped (much after I left). That's not Redhat anymore, it's IBM. The lovely RHEL people and CentOS people didn't have a say. We kept hearing and believing that the CentOS stream change was never intended to break CentOS users until they hid the sources. RHEL is built on open source products, and support is sold. To innovate in open source by coming up with ways to get around GPL (we'll retaliate if you publish our legally publishable sources IIUC) is evil. In direct violation of what every other contributor to linux/GNU/anything GPL ever released their software under. Disclaimer: I was part of other projects, not this directly, and I had nothing, but respect and love for everyone I worked with. We were in denial then too.
  - jchw 3y ago
    > Jeff (and everybody else) jumped on the hate bandwagon. It wasn't kind, it was mob behavior, and it completely lacked any nuance. Hate bandwagon? I'm not a huge follower of Jeff's but I have never seen a single thing from them that I would consider "hateful" or jumping on a bandwagon. What I can gather is that you disagree with those who did not like Red Hat's actions w.r.t. CentOS and RHEL updates, but just because you side with Red Hat here doesn't really make the argument less valid, neither does unjustly categorizing it as hateful. (Or false. I'm not seeing the reams of false claims. I see some accurate ones though, like that Redhat had promised not to change access to the sources previously[1].) [1]: https://www.learnlinux.tv/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/red_hat_news_final-0001-1024x209.png https://www.learnlinux.tv/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/red_hat...
    - emptysongglass 3y ago
      > Hate bandwagon? I'm not a huge follower of Jeff's but I have never seen a single thing from them that I would consider "hateful" or jumping on a bandwagon I'll just address this bit. Yes, it was a hate bandwagon and it wasn't jumping on one, it was leading it. It was all over his LinkedIn and everywhere else he could post at the time.
      - jchw 3y ago
        Something isn't hateful just because you don't like it or don't agree with it. (It's also not a bandwagon just because other people agree with it, but that's neither here nor there at this point.)
        emptysongglass 3y ago
        It was hateful and yes it was a bandwagon. Go to any Reddit or Lemmy thread about the debacle to see what that looks like.
  - kelnos 3y ago
    I tend not to take seriously the opinions of people who call others who use open source software according to the terms of its license "freeloaders". (And I say this as an open source developer myself, who has spent thousands of hours writing code for free.) If you want to side with Red Hat on this, fine, but it's not necessary to exaggerate the actions of those with an opposing view to the point that you're trying to make them look bad. I also in general think it's silly and unnecessary to defend a giant corporation (remember, IBM owns Red Hat now, and it's not like RH had been a scrappy little Linux company for a long while before the acquisition, even) over regular ol' community members and IT sysadmins who have a beef.
    - emptysongglass 3y ago
      I also don't believe in defending big corporate but Jeff's takes were wildly out of touch with what was actually happening. I do not love Red Hat or any corporation and I think their messaging could have been a lot better but I don't think the people who together make up Alma or Rocky acted in any way in good faith and I do find their desire to have everything hand prepared for them by Red Hat spoiled behavior. The sources are all still there, they just need to work a little harder to get it. Forgive me if I shed no tears.
      - TheNewsIsHere 3y ago
        I had some very early, somewhat tangential, and long-discontinued involvement in the very early days of Rocky. Before CIQ was even a thing. Generally speaking, the people who did the work to found RESF weren’t doing so in order to have someone else do their work for them and just rebrand it. There was a terrific amount of work that happened because a huge community of users had just had the rugged pulled out from under them. (To be very clear, on a personal level I have some deep and stringently opposed views to some people in the RESF/CIQ ecosystem. I’m not offering any unconditional or personal defenses.) Jeff’s takes were some of the most measured of the disagreement with Red Hat’s moves that I’ve seen.
      - yipbub 3y ago
        You seem to be on a crusade of the same level of "hate"(your standards, not mine) too. Against a person in fact.

by davisr 3y ago

This is the guy who kicked up all the dirt about Red Hat, which IMO was entirely overblown. Not to say that he's a bad dude...but be careful of who you listen to on the Internet.

sfsdf343425 3y ago

Gotta admit that the writing is very good and his content are entertaining, regardless of the content or (mis)information.

jchw 3y ago

Why do you feel it is particularly overblown?

emptysongglass 3y ago
Because so much of it was just completely false. Jeff positioned Red Hat as going against the community, which wasn't the case at all. The "bad actors" were squarely Rocky and Alma who just wanted to sell the exact same ten year support enterprise Red Hat as Red Hat themselves without any work. Well, Red Hat said, you want it, you go get it in Stream, which has a 5 year lifecycle. The only companies that need ten year lifecycles are the same consumers Red Hat caters to with RHEL. Red Hat is continuing to honor all its licensing terms. It just isn't doing its freeloading competitors any favors. And yes: they're freeloaders. Red Hat's choice never touched the community in any way. As a hobbyist who uses Red Hat stuff, I'm not using RHEL, and even if I was, Red Hat gives generous licenses for hobbyists like me. Jeff (and everybody else) jumped on the hate bandwagon. It wasn't kind, it was mob behavior, and it completely lacked any nuance.
- geerlingguy 3y ago
  That sounds like some great revisionist history. Thousands of sysadmins, open source devs, even Hatters themselves used CentOS as a proxy for RHEL where they didn't want to deal with licensing crap. In the middle of the CentOS 8 lifecycle, they converted CentOS to CentOS Stream (nobody asked for this), forcing everyone who had migrated their tooling and infra from CentOS 7 to 8 to migrate instead to... what? Rocky/Alma stepped in and saved the day for all those folks. Then in the middle of the CentOS Stream 9 lifecycle, they hid some of the sources required for rebuilding a CentOS-equivalent (at least simply/easily) behind a Red Hat account and told the community they should be happy with 16 dev licenses for RHEL if they truly needed RHEL compatibility. As I said then, "no thanks."
  - emptysongglass 3y ago
    Jeff, plenty of smarter people than me came out against you to correct your crusade. As a practicing Christian, I'd expect more from you than coming out to lead a mob frothing at the mouth for blood. You didn't even try and have a reasonable discourse with Red Hatters. As an influencer, you have a responsibility not to encourage this kind of social media vitriol that's become all too common. It's a contagion upon the human mind and you are directly responsible for whipping people up in this one.
    - kelnos 3y ago
      > plenty of smarter people than me came out against you to correct your crusade. Doesn't mean they were right.
    - yipbub 3y ago
      Ex-Redhatter that watched stuff go down while defending it till I stopped (much after I left). That's not Redhat anymore, it's IBM. The lovely RHEL people and CentOS people didn't have a say. We kept hearing and believing that the CentOS stream change was never intended to break CentOS users until they hid the sources. RHEL is built on open source products, and support is sold. To innovate in open source by coming up with ways to get around GPL (we'll retaliate if you publish our legally publishable sources IIUC) is evil. In direct violation of what every other contributor to linux/GNU/anything GPL ever released their software under. Disclaimer: I was part of other projects, not this directly, and I had nothing, but respect and love for everyone I worked with. We were in denial then too.
- jchw 3y ago
  > Jeff (and everybody else) jumped on the hate bandwagon. It wasn't kind, it was mob behavior, and it completely lacked any nuance. Hate bandwagon? I'm not a huge follower of Jeff's but I have never seen a single thing from them that I would consider "hateful" or jumping on a bandwagon. What I can gather is that you disagree with those who did not like Red Hat's actions w.r.t. CentOS and RHEL updates, but just because you side with Red Hat here doesn't really make the argument less valid, neither does unjustly categorizing it as hateful. (Or false. I'm not seeing the reams of false claims. I see some accurate ones though, like that Redhat had promised not to change access to the sources previously[1].) [1]: https://www.learnlinux.tv/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/red_hat_news_final-0001-1024x209.png https://www.learnlinux.tv/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/red_hat...
  - emptysongglass 3y ago
    > Hate bandwagon? I'm not a huge follower of Jeff's but I have never seen a single thing from them that I would consider "hateful" or jumping on a bandwagon I'll just address this bit. Yes, it was a hate bandwagon and it wasn't jumping on one, it was leading it. It was all over his LinkedIn and everywhere else he could post at the time.
    - jchw 3y ago
      Something isn't hateful just because you don't like it or don't agree with it. (It's also not a bandwagon just because other people agree with it, but that's neither here nor there at this point.)
      - emptysongglass 3y ago
        It was hateful and yes it was a bandwagon. Go to any Reddit or Lemmy thread about the debacle to see what that looks like.
- kelnos 3y ago
  I tend not to take seriously the opinions of people who call others who use open source software according to the terms of its license "freeloaders". (And I say this as an open source developer myself, who has spent thousands of hours writing code for free.) If you want to side with Red Hat on this, fine, but it's not necessary to exaggerate the actions of those with an opposing view to the point that you're trying to make them look bad. I also in general think it's silly and unnecessary to defend a giant corporation (remember, IBM owns Red Hat now, and it's not like RH had been a scrappy little Linux company for a long while before the acquisition, even) over regular ol' community members and IT sysadmins who have a beef.
  - emptysongglass 3y ago
    I also don't believe in defending big corporate but Jeff's takes were wildly out of touch with what was actually happening. I do not love Red Hat or any corporation and I think their messaging could have been a lot better but I don't think the people who together make up Alma or Rocky acted in any way in good faith and I do find their desire to have everything hand prepared for them by Red Hat spoiled behavior. The sources are all still there, they just need to work a little harder to get it. Forgive me if I shed no tears.
    - TheNewsIsHere 3y ago
      I had some very early, somewhat tangential, and long-discontinued involvement in the very early days of Rocky. Before CIQ was even a thing. Generally speaking, the people who did the work to found RESF weren’t doing so in order to have someone else do their work for them and just rebrand it. There was a terrific amount of work that happened because a huge community of users had just had the rugged pulled out from under them. (To be very clear, on a personal level I have some deep and stringently opposed views to some people in the RESF/CIQ ecosystem. I’m not offering any unconditional or personal defenses.) Jeff’s takes were some of the most measured of the disagreement with Red Hat’s moves that I’ve seen.
    - yipbub 3y ago
      You seem to be on a crusade of the same level of "hate"(your standards, not mine) too. Against a person in fact.